Univcnity  of  California  •  Berkeley 
REGIONAL  ORAL  HISTORY  OFFICE 


Regional  Oral  History  Office  University  of  California 

The  Bancroft  Library  Berkeley,  California 

History  of  Bay  Area  Philanthropy  Series 


Sally  Lilienthal 
FUNDING  PREVENTION  OF  NUCLEAR  WAR 


With  an  Introduction  by 
William  Mat son  Roth 


An  Interview  Conducted  by 
Gabrielle  Morris 
in  1987 


Copyright  (T)  1989  by  the  Regents  of  the  University  of  California 


Since  1954  the  Regional  Oral  History  Office  has  been  interviewing 
leading  participants  in  or  well-placed  witnesses  to  major  events  in  the 
development  of  Northern  California,  the  West, and  the  Nation.   Oral  history  is 
a  modern  research  technique  involving  an  interviewee  and  an  informed 
interviewer  in  spontaneous  conversation.   The  taped  record  is  transcribed, 
lightly  edited  for  continuity  and  clarity,  and  reviewed  by  the  interviewee. 
The  resulting  manuscript  is  typed  in  final  form,  indexed,  bound  with 
photographs  and  illustrative  materials,  and  placed  in  The  Bancroft  Library  at 
the  University  of  California,  Berkeley,  and  other  research  collections  for 
scholarly  use.   Because  it  is  primary  material,  oral  history  is  not  intended 
to  present  the  final,  verified,  or  complete  narrative  of  events.   It  is  a 
spoken  account,  offered  by  the  interviewee  in  response  to  questioning,  and  as 
such  it  is  reflective,  partisan,  deeply  involved,  and  irreplaceable. 


************************************ 


All  uses  of  this  manuscript  are  covered  by  a  legal 
agreement  between  the  University  of  California  and  Sally 
Lilienthal  dated  November  12,  1987.   The  manuscript  is 
thereby  made  available  for  research  purposes.   All  literary 
rights  in  the  manuscript,  including  the  right  to  publish, 
are  reserved  to  The  Bancroft  Library  of  the  University  of 
California,  Berkeley.   No  part  of  the  manuscript  may  be 
quoted  for  publication  without  the  written  permission  of  the 
Director  of  The  Bancroft  Library  of  the  University  of 
California,  Berkeley. 

Request  for  permission  to  quote  for  publication  should 
be  addressed  to  the  Regional  Oral  History  Office,  486 
Library,  University  of  California,  Berkeley  94720,  and 
should  include  identification  of  the  specific  passages  to  be 
quoted,  anticipated  use  of  the  passages,  and  identification 
of  the  user.  The  legal  agreement  with  Sally  Lilienthal 
requires  that  she  be  notified  of  the  request  and  allowed 
thirty  days  in  which  to  respond. 

It  is  recommended  that  this  oral  history  be  cited  as 
follows: 

Sally  Lilienthal,  "Funding  Prevention  of 
Nuclear  War,"  an  oral  history  conducted  in 
1987  by  Gabrielle  Morris,  the  Regional 
Oral  History  Office,  The  Bancroft  Library, 
University  of  California,  Berkeley,  1989. 


Copy  No. 


SALLY  LILIENTHAL 
FORT  MASON,  SAN  FRANCISCO 
1987 


Photograph  by  Borensztein 


TABLE  OF  CONTENTS  —  Sally  Lilienthal 


PREFACE  i 

INTRODUCTION  by  William  Matson  Roth  vil 

INTERVIEW  HISTORY  ix 

BRIEF  BIOGRAPHY 

I   FAMILY  AND  YOUTH  1 

Childhood  in  Portland,  Oregon  1 

Teenager  in  San  Francisco  4 

II   SARAH  LAWRENCE  COLLEGE,  1936-1940  8 

Eastern  College  Expectations  8 

Literary  Exposure  9 

Political  Currents:   Lincoln  Brigade  and  Anti-Semitism               10 

One-on-One  Teaching  14 

Phil  Lilienthal  in  New  York  15 

III  WITH  THE  OFFICE  OF  WAR  INFORMATION,  1941-1946  17 

Family  Troubles;  Advertising  Job  17 

Observing  Germans  in  South  America  19 

Asian  Broadcasts  and  Study  Programs  19 

Owen  Lattimore  as  Head  of  OWI  23 

IV  COUNCIL  ON  CIVIC  UNITY,  WORLD  FEDERALISM,  1950s-1960s  24 

Early  Civil  Rights  Efforts  24 

Communist  Take-over  Attempt  25 

Tom  Cohen  26 

Minorities  in  the  Bay  Area;  Fears  of  the  Atom  Bomb                   26 

Anti-communism  Issues;  Loyalty  Oath  29 

V  CAREER  IN  THE  ARTS  31 

Studying  Sculpture  31 

California  School  of  Fine  Arts;  Helping  Minorities  33 

San  Francisco  Art  Commission;  Harold  Zellerbach                     34 

Neighborhood  Arts  Program  36 

Revamping  the  Art  School;  Art  Auctions  38 

Art  Commission  Politics  39 


VI  DEVELOPING  SKILLS  IN  ORGANIZATION  AND  INNOVATION  42 

Art  Institute  Symposium  42 

Collecting  Art;  Raising  Children  44 

San  Francisco  Art  Museum  Board;  Performing  Arts  Program  47 

Creating  New  Audiences  49 

VII  MUSEUM  OF  MODERN  ART  RENTAL  GALLERY  51 

Support  for  Young,  Unknown  Artists  51 

Business  and  Other  Clients  54 

Aside  on  Ploughshares  Meeting  in  New  York,  September  1987  56 

VIII  GIVING  AND  RAISING  MONEY  IN  THE  1960s  AND  1970s  60 

Fair  Housing  Legislation  60 

American  Civil  Liberties  Union  62 

Budget  Needs  vs.  Innovation:   Sierra  Club  and  ACLU  65 
Writing  and  Reviewing  Grant  Applications:   San  Francisco 

Foundation  and  Ploughshares  67 

IX  AMNESTY  INTERNATIONAL,  1972-1979  70 

Fundraising  in  the  East  70 

Early  Interest;  European  Organization  71 

San  Francisco  Adoption  Groups;  Freeing  Fernando  Flores  74 

Urgent  Action  Network  77 

Nobel  Peace  Prize,  1977  79 

Adding  Public  Relations  Staff  81 

Starting  a  Northern  California  Group;  Cloak  and  Dagger  Adventures  87 

National  Board  Member  87 

Direct-Mail  Fundraising:   Pros  and  Cons  88 

Adoptee  in  India  93 

Lilienthal  Family  Views  94 

Managing  Policy  96 

Philanthropy  in  San  Francisco;  Advocacy  98 

X  CREATING  THE  PLOUGHSHARES  FUND,  1979-1980  100 
Preliminary  Thoughts  and  Discussions;  Personal  Concern  About 

Nuclear  War;  Scarcity  of  Donors  100 

Personal  Giving  103 

Organizing  Meetings/Group  105 

Advisers  and  Early  Board  Members  109 

A  Public  Foundation;  Initial  Support  and  Staff  112 

More  on  Advisers  and  Their  Role  115 

XI  DEVELOPING  GRANTS  POLICIES  AND  FINANCIAL  SUPPORT  121 

Considering  Applications  121 

Accessibility;  International  and  Individual  Grants  123 

Working  with  Other  Foundations  126 

Women's  Leadership  Development;  Affecting  Public  Decisions  128 

Donor  Growth  130 

First  Executive  Director,  1982;  More  on  Grants  to  Individuals  131 


XII  BROADENING  PLOUGHSHARES'  IMPACT  134 

Strengthening  Grantee  Organizations  134 

Nuclear  Issues  in  the  Foundation  World  136 

Retired  Military  Advisers  138 

Narrowing  Granting  Focus;  Replacing  the  Executive  Director  140 

Responding  to  World  Events;  Treaty  Verification  143 

XIII  EVALUATION:   SOME  SIGNIFICANT  PROGRAMS  145 

Monitoring  Grants  and  Applicants  145 

Political  Education,  1983-1984;  Other  Strategic  Concerns  147 

Qualifications  of  Applicants,  Site  Visits  149 
The  Nuclear  Issues  Community:  SANE,  Freeze,  etc.,  and 

Funding  Sources  150 

Stock  Market  Drop,  1987;  Grants  Budgets  152 

Women  at  the  US-USSR  Summit;  Some  Reservations  153 

Need  for  Visibility  154 

Nuclear  Countdown  Press  Kits  156 

Global  Security:   Future  Plans  158 

XIV  ORGANIZATIONAL  CONCERNS;  PERSONAL  PRINCIPLES  160 

Board  Selection,  Small  Grants  Committee,  Washington  Office  160 

Public  Foundations:   Increasing  Individual  Involvement  162 

Continuity  and  Effective  Giving  163 

Women  and  Charitable  Giving  165 

TAPE  GUIDE  168 

APPENDIX 

Brief  biography  -  March  1987  169 
"Ploughshares'  never-ending  crusade,"  Caroline  Drewes, 

San  Francisco  Sunday  Examiner  &  Chronicle,  November  10,  1985  170 
"Peace:   A  Role  for  Philanthropy,"  Sally  Lilienthal, 

Women  and  Foundations/Corporate  Philanthropy, 

Spring/Summer  1986  172 
"World  Class,  Sally  Lilienthal:  Turning  swords  into 

ploughshares,"  Albert  Haas,  Jr.,  San  Francisco  Magazine, 

July  1987  174 

INDEX  177 


PREFACE 


Northern  California  Grantmakers  and  the  Regional  Oral 
History  Office  of  The  Bancroft  Library  at  the  University  of 
California  at  Berkeley  are  pleased  to  present  the  first 
installment  of  a  series  of  twelve  oral  histories  documenting 
the  growth  and  development  of  Bay  Area  philanthropy  during  the 
last  twenty- five  years.   It  is  our  hope  that  these  memoirs 
will  both  preserve  a  record  of  the  experiences  and 
philosophies  of  selected  senior  members  of  the  philanthropic 
community,  and  encourage  greater  understanding  and  discussion 
of  the  traditions  of  charitable  giving. 

The  starting  point  for  this  series  was  an  earlier  project 
of  the  Regional  Oral  History  Office,  completed  in  1976,  which 
documented  Bay  Area  foundation  history  in  the  1930s  and  1940s, 
and  the  evolution  of  issues  and  leadership  in  the  1950s  and 
1960s.   The  new  series  will  focus  on  the  significant  changes 
which  have  occurred  since  that  time,  including  the  tremendous 
growth  in  corporate  giving,  changes  in  the  role  of  the 
government  in  supporting  the  arts  and  human  services,  and 
increased  collaboration  among  grantmakers. 

Selection  of  prospective  interviewees  for  the  project 
involved  many  hard  choices  among  outstanding  persons  in  Bay 
Area  philanthropy.  The  final  selection  was  made  by  The 
Bancroft  Library,  arid  reflects  the  broad  spectrum  of 
grantmaking  organizations  and  styles  in  the  Bay  Area.   The 
guiding  principal  has  been  to  preserve  a  record  of  the 
thinking  and  experience  of  men  and  women  who  have  made 
significant  contributions  in  shaping  the  philanthropic 
response  to  the  many  changes  which  have  occurred  over  the  last 
twenty- five  years. 


11 


Overall  guidance  for  the  project  has  been  provided  by  an 
advisory  committee  composed  of  representatives  from  the 
philanthropic  community  and  the  U.C.  Berkeley  faculty.   The 
advisory  committee  is  particularly  indebted  to  Florette  White 
Pomeroy  and  John  R.  May,  whose  enthusiasm,  leadership  and  wise 
counsel  made  the  project  possible.   The  committee  is  also 
grateful  to  the  eleven  foundations  and  corporations  which 
generously  contributed  the  necessary  financial  support  to 
conduct  the  project.   Members  of  the  advisory  committee  and 
the  contributors  are  listed  on  the  following  pages. 

The  director  for  the  project  is  Gabri'elle  Morris,  who 
conducted  the  previous  project  on  the  history  of  Bay  Area 
foundations.   Willa  Baum,  head  of  the  Regional  Oral  History 
Office,  provides  administrative  supervision,  and  overall 
supervision  and  much  helpful  guidance  has  been  provided  by 
Professor  James  D.  Hart,  Director  of  The  Bancroft  Library. 

For  the  advisory  committee, 

Ruth  Chance 
Thomas  Layton 

April  1989 

San  Francisco,  California 


iii 


HISTORY  OF  BAY  AREA  PHILANTHROPY  SERIES 


Herman  E.  Gallegos,  Equity  and  Diversity:   Hispanics  in  the 
Nonprofit  World.  1989. 

Roger  W.  Heyns ,  Collected  Thoughts  on  Grantmaking  and  the  Hewlett 
Foundation.  1989. 

Sally  Lilienthal,  Funding  Prevention  of  Nuclear  War.  1989. 

Mary  C.  Skaggs  and  Philip  Jelley,  Specialized  Granting  with 
National  and  International  Impact.  1989. 

Morris  Doyle,  in  process. 
Leslie  Luttgens ,  in  process. 
Madeleine  Haas  Russell,  in  process. 


iv 


Bay  Area  Foundation  History  Series 
June,  1976 


Volume  I 

Introduction  to  series 

John  Rickard  May,  Building  a  Community  Foundation 

Volume  II 

Ruth  Chance,  At  the  Heart  of  Grants  for  Youth 

Volume  III 

Daniel  J.  Koshland,  Responding  to  the  Flow  of  New  Ideas  in  the  Community 

Philip  S.  Ehrlich,  Sr.,  An  Attorney's  Twenty-five  Years  of  Philanthropic 

Service 

Josephine  Whitney  Duveneck,  Working  for  a  Real  Democracy  with  Children 

and  other  Minority  Groups 

Marjorie  Doran  Elkus,  Recollections  of  San  Francisco  Private  Agencies  and 

Foundations,  1935-1950 

Dorothy  W.  Erskine,  Environmental  Quality  and  Planning:  Continuity  of 

Volunteer  Leadership 

Florence  Richardson  Wyckoff ,  A  Volunteer  Career ,  from  the  Arts  and 

Education  to  Public  Health  Issues 

Burnett  Gamaliel  Solomon,  A  Corporate  Citizen's  Concern  for  the  Effective 
ness  of  a  Community  Foundation 

Bill  Somerville,  A  Foundation  Executive  in  Training,  1961-1974 

Volume  IV 

Frank  Sloss,  Tradition  and  Change:  Continuing  Education  of  a  Foundation 

Board  Member 
Edmond  S.  Gillette,  Jr.,  Smaller  Foundation  Trusteeship:  Obligations  to 

Friendship  and  the  Community 

Charles  Clock,  A  Sociologist  Comments  on  Getting,  Using,  and  Making  Grants 
Jean  Gerlinger  Kuhn,  Balance  and  Order  in  a  Community  Trust 
William  Matson  Roth,  The  Tradition  of  Voluntary  Solutions  to  Public 

Problems 
Richard  Foster,  Avoiding  Institutional  Entropy;  A  School  Superintendent's 

View 

Orville  Luster,  Growth  of  a  Grassroots  Youth  Agency  in  the  1960s 
Obie  Benz  and  Peter  Stern,  A  New  Generation  of  Grant-making  Ideas 

Volume  V 

Milton  Salkind,  New  Vitality  in  the  San  Francisco  Conservatory  of  Music 
E.  P.  (Red)  Stephenson,  Transition:  White  Man  in  a  Black  Town,  1950-1967 
Caroline  Moore  Charles,  Development  and  Dynamics  of  Volunteer  Organizations 
Arabella  Martinez,  The  Spanish-speaking  Unity  Council,  Inc.,  and  Bay  Area 

Foundations 

Ira  DeVoyd  Hall,  Jr.,  Community  Resources:  Turning  Ideas  into  Action 
Sam  Yuen,  Philosopher  and  Community  Agency  Administrator 

For  additional  oral  histories  on  philanthropy  and  nonprofit  organizations, 
consult  the  Regional  Oral  History  Office. 


HISTORY  OF  BAY  AREA  PHILANTHROPY 


ADVISORY  COMMITTEE 


Ruth  Chance,  Co -Chair 
Rosenberg  Foundation  (retired) 

Thomas  Lay ton,  Co -Chair 
Wallace  Alexander  Gerbode  Foundation 

Marcia  Argyris 
McKesson  Foundation 

Walter  A.  Haas,  Jr. 
Evelyn  &  Walter  Haas  Jr.  Fund 

Susan  Little 

San  Francisco  Foundation 
(resigned  1988) 

John  R.  May* 
San  Francisco  Foundation  (retired) 

Florette  W.  Pomeroy* 
Consultants  in  Philanthropy 

Bruce  Sievers 
Walter  &  Elise  Haas  Fund 

Caroline  Tower 
Northern  California  Grantmakers 


U.C.  BERKELEY  FACULTY  ADVISORS 

Richard  Abrams 
Department  of  History 

William  R.  Ellis 
School  of  Education 

Paula  Gillett 
Graduate  School  of  Education 

James  D.  Hart 
The  Bancroft  Library 

Ralph  Kramer 
School  of  Social  Welfare 


*Deceased  during  the  term  of  the  project 


vi 


The  Regional  Oral  History  Office  would  like  to  express  its 
thanks  to  the  following  organizations  whose  encouragement  and  support 
have  made  possible  the  History  of  Bay  Area  Philanthropy  Series. 

Wallace  Alexander  Gerbode  Foundation 
Evelyn  and  Walter  Haas  Jr.  Foundation 
Miriam  and  Peter  Haas  Foundation 
Walter  and  Elise  Haas  Foundation 
William  and  Flora  Hewlett  Foundation 
James  Irvine  Foundation 
Walter  S.  Johnson  Foundation 
Northern  California  Grantmakers 
David  and  Lucile  Packard  Foundation 
San  Francisco  Foundation 

L.J.  Skaggs  and  Mary  C.  Skaggs  Foundation 
Wells  Fargo  Foundation 


vii 


INTRODUCTION 


To  read  the  table  of  contents  of  this  oral  history  and  to  be  reminded 
of  the  range  of  Sally's  activities,  is  a  lesson  in  humility.  Her  early 
and  continuing  interest  in  painting  and  sculpture,  her  commitment  to  her 
family  and  friends,  co-exist  and  are  a  part  of  her  active  involvement  in 
liberal  causes.   Within  it  all,  there  is  a  consistency  of  purpose  and 
vision  that  gives  her  life  coherence  and  force.   To  whatever  she  does, 
Sally  brings  not  only  compassion  and  care,  but  discrimination,  common- 
sense,  and  humor.   Rare  qualities  indeed  in  the  social  and  political 
mine-fields  in  which  she  has  operated. 

In  a  position  to  give  both  of  her  resources  and  energies,  she  has 
done  so  in  generous  measure.   The  American  Civil  Liberties  Union  and 
Amnesty  International  come  especially  to  mind.   Her  ability  to  be 
innovative  as  well  as  practical  can  best  be  seen,  however,  in  those 
organizations  that  she  herself  founded.   As  a  member  of  the  board  of  the 
San  Francisco  Museum  of  Modern  Art,  she  discovered  that  a  rental  gallery, 
squeezed  into  inadequate  space,  was  not  serving  the  function  it  might 
in  promoting  the  work  of  younger  artists.   She  sought  permission  to  move 
the  gallery  to  Fort  Mason  where,  under  her  active  guidance,  it  became  an 
exciting  and  successful  addition  to  the  City's  art  community. 

Ploughshares,  that  enormously  successful  enterprise,  also  was  formed 
to  meet  a  need.   Although  there  had  been  for  some  years  study  and  activist 
organizations  concerned  with  arms-control,  defense  policy,  relations  with 
Russia,  etc.,  their  work  was  underfunded.   Sally  and  her  late  husband, 
Phil  Lilienthal,  established  a  foundation  to  fill  that  gap.   Aware  that 
not  all  the  individuals  and  groups  working  in  these  areas  were  knowledgeable 
or  effective,  they  asked  a  panel  of  distinguished  experts  in  foreign 
affairs,  science,  and  government,  to  serve  as  advisors.   In  addition,  they 
chose  a  well  balanced  board  of  directors  to  ensure  that  projects  were 
screened  for  their  practicality,  their  chance  of  success,  and  the  examples 
they  might  set.   In  spite  of  the  able  assistance  Ploughshares  has  received, 
however,  the  foundation's  energy,  its  achievement  in  raising  funds  to 
match  Sally's  own,  and  its  strategies  have  depended  and  still  depend 
upon  her  own  unceasing  drive.   Her  fundraising  letters  are  masterpieces — 
informative  and  persuasive.   Professionals  would  blush  with  envy. 

What  Sally  has  accomplished  has  required  not  only  concern  and 
initiative,  but  imagination,  as  well.   There  is  indeed  a  connection  between 
her  interest  in  the  arts,  her  work  as  a  practicing  sculptor,  and  an 
activist  career  in  community  and  national  affairs.   There  is  no  shrillness 


viii 


in  her  approach,  she  is  never  doctrinaire.   She  is  open  to  new  ideas; 
she  listens.   Sally  is  balanced  in  her  judgments,  knowing  that  there  are 
other  dimensions  in  her  life — and  in  the  lives  of  those  she  works  with — 
that  must  be  fulfilled. 

This  is  perhaps  why  over  the  years,  her  family  and  her  friends  have 
been  so  important  to  her.   In  tragic  times  and  good,  she  has  confronted 
the  complexities  of  marriage,  raising  children,  and  friendship  with  good 
humor,  affection,  and  courage.   She  is  an  adventurous  lady,  and  will 
take  chances,  pushing  not  only  herself,  but  others  in  the  pursuit  of 
difficult  but  desirable  goals. 

In  a  way,  Sally's  house  on  Vallejo  Street,  designed  by  Joe  Escherick, 
forms  a  base  for  her  efforts,  both  actually  and  symbolically.   It  is  a 
simple  modern  structure  with  a  garage  and  one  story  showing  on  a  street 
of  Renaissance  and  Tudor  homes.   Wooden  stairs  descend  to  the  front  door 
and  to  the  living  room  whose  balcony  extends  over  the  cliff  below.   It 
is  a  simple  and  elegant  room,  with  marvelous  art.  Although  Ploughshares 
now  has  its  own  offices  in  Fort  Mason,  it  was  organized  and  initially 
operated  out  of  Sally's  home  and  this  space  remains,  as  does  its  owner, 
the  heart  of  the  enterprise. 


William  Matson  Roth 


July  1988 

Princeton,  New  Jersey 


ix 


INTERVIEW  HISTORY 


"Of  course  you  can  do  it  if  you  want  to,"  was  the  reply  Sally 
Lilienthal  got  when  she  asked  for  advice  about  starting  a  foundation 
dedicated  to  the  prevention  of  nuclear  war.   "Yes,  dear,  why  don't  you." 
In  the  following  oral  history,  Mrs.  Lilienthal  relates  how  she  and  a 
small  group  of  cohorts  in  1979  went  ahead  and  created  the  San  Francisco- 
based  Ploughshares  Fund,  which  in  less  than  ten  years  time  has  come  to 
be  a  significant  vehicle  for  people  seeking  a  way  to  be  involved  in 
encouraging  new  avenues  to  world  peace. 

Although  she  does  not  consider  herself  a  professional  person,  this 
slender,  stylish  woman's  preparation  for  undertaking  the  myriad 
challenges  of  national  grantmaking  included  a  dedication  to  human  rights 
and  a  variety  of  demanding  experiences  in  voluntary  organizations.  As 
she  tells  of  these  activities  with  warmth  and  enthusiasm,  it  becomes 
clear  that  through  them  she  was  becoming  increasingly  skillful  in  the 
practice  of  philanthropy.  Among  friends  who  shared  her  interests  were 
Martha  Gerbode,  Clarence  Heller  (known  as  Clary),  and  William  Matson 
Roth.   When  one  of  these  friends  came  across  a  person  with  a  project 
of  importance,  he  or  she  would  be  sent  to  talk  to  others  of  the  friends, 
one  of  whom  frequently  put  up  some  money  to  get  the  idea  into  action. 

Underlying  her  public-spirited  interests  is  an  artistic  sense  that 
goes  back  to  childhood,  when  she  was  expected  to  be  "creative."  As  a 
young  matron  in  San  Francisco  with  five  young  children,  Sally — as  she 
is  usually  referred  to — began  studying  sculpture,  and  soon  became  a 
member  of  the  board  of  the  San  Francisco  Art  Institute,  where  she  staged 
auctions  and  symposia  to  raise  funds  and  sought  ways  to  encourage  young, 
minority  students.   On  the  board  of  the  Museum  of  Modern  Art,  she 
created  a  neighborhood  arts  program  which  showed  the  work  of  young  African 
and  Mexican  Americans  and  brought  their  families  and  friends  into  the 
museum.   Appointed  to  the  city  Art  Commission,  she  encouraged  similar 
efforts  and,  a  story  she  tells  with  humor  and  understanding,  challenged 
established  ideas  on  how  the  commission  should  be  managed. 

During  this  same  period,  the  1960s,  she  sat  on  the  board  of  the  local 
ACLU  chapter  and  set  up  a  fund  in  memory  of  her  first  husband,  Tom  Cohen, 
at  the  San  Francisco  Foundation  to  be  used  for  improvement  of  race 
relations.   By  the  1970s,  she  was  deeply  involved  with  Amnesty  Inter 
national,  chairing  several  local  political-prisoner  support  groups, 
organizing  a  northern  California  chapter,  and  going  on  the  national 
board.   Some  of  these  acquaintances,  she  notes,  joined  the  cause  when 
Ploughshares  was  created. 


As  time  went  on,  says  Sally,  "I  came  to  understand  that  one  needs 
to  be  focused  in  what  one  does."  One  focus  continued  to  be  art, 
which  she  had  collected  widely  for  some  years.   In  1978  she  turned  this 
interest  to  founding  a  rental  gallery  for  the  Museum  of  Modern  Art,  which 
became  an  immediate  and  lasting  success,  again  providing  a  profitable 
showcase  for  young  artists. 

The  other  focus  was  world  peace.   Having  become  unhappy  with  the 
management  of  the  endowment  for  race  relations  and  more  alarmed  about 
the  threat  of  nuclear  war,  she  decided  to  concentrate  her  personal  giving 
in  this  area.   In  no  time,  she  recalls,  she  called  together  an  ad  hoc 
group  of  friends  with  personal  philanthropy  and  foundation  experience  and 
shared  her  ideas.   "They  said  a  foundation  was  a  great  idea  and  the  first 
thing  we  should  do  was  hire  a  consultant." 

"It  did  occur  to  me  that  you  couldn't  hire  a  consultant  to  find 
out  whether  one  could  do  something  that's  never  been  done  and  that  the 
consultant  himself  didn't  have  experience  in."  What  follows  in  the  oral 
history  is  a  detailed  and  exhilarating  account  of  how  this  small  group 
pooled  their  considerable  skills  in  the  ways  of  foundations  with  Sally's 
growing  knowledge  of  the  community  of  people  working  to  find  alternate 
routes  to  peace  and  global  security,  and  created  the  Ploughshares  Fund. 

Within  its  first  year,  the  fund  had  62  donors  and  made  grants  of 
$150,000.  For  1984-85,  950  donors  contributed  $625,672  which  went  to 
86  grantees.  By  1986-87,  the  grants  budget  was  a  million  dollars  and 
rising. 

Still  not  describing  herself  as  a  professional,  Sally  does  say  she 
works  closely  with  Ploughshares'  executive  director,  meeting  with 
contributors  and  working  with  grantees  and  applicants  to  develop  the 
agenda  for  the  board.   Enthusiastically,  she  credits  the  board  with 
creating  flexible  policies  and  shaping  the  focus  of  the  foundations 's 
encouragement  for  "programs  to  affect  opinion,  which  in  turn  one  would 
hope  would  affect  government  opinion." 

Reading  the  oral  history  provides  an  immediate  sense  of  the  creation 
and  operation  of  a  vital  and  effective  philanthropic  venture.   Speaking 
with  Sally  Lilienthal  off  tape,  one  hears  a  vibrant  flow  of  new 
experiences  and  ideas  as  Ploughshares  continues  to  develop. 

One  of  Sally's  skills  is  a  capacity  for  taking  pains  with  details. 
She  knows  many  grantees  personally,  and  delights  in  contacting  other 
funders  to  pass  along  suggestions  about  a  particularly  promising  prospect. 
Mailings  from  Ploughshares  are  usually  carefully  written  by  Sally  herself 


xi 


and  reflect  the  immediacy  of  her  concerns.  When  she  agreed  to  do  this 
oral  history,  she  cleared  space  on  her  busy  schedule  for  regular 
interview  sessions,  usually  two  hours  long.  When  she  received  the  rough- 
edited  transcript,  she  went  through  it  with  a  stern  editorial  eye, 
removed  several  passages  she  found  vague  or  irrelevant  and  tightened 
up  others  to  be  more  specific.   Readers  will  feel  that  they  have,  indeed, 
had  an  invigorating  conversation  with  Sally  Lilienthal. 


Gabrielle  Morris 
Interviewer-Editor 


February  1989 

Regional  Oral  History  Office 
486  The  Bancroft  Library 
University  of  California,  Berkeley 


Regional  Oral  History  Office  University  of  California 

Room  486  The  Bancroft  Library  Berkeley,  California   94720 

BIOGRAPHICAL  INFORMATION 


Your  full  name 


(Please  write  clearly.  Use  black  ink.) 
S  «=l  U 


Date  of  birth     +*      i  Birthplace 


i  l  1  '  1      Birthplace   fov-H*.**,   O 


Father's  full  name 


Occupation       Bx/  •*''*•*•  J*    U**'A  _    Birthplace      fe»-M«H,A. 

Mother's   full  name  ft  »~  ^          0  H.  Wg.1  J  <  ,'^>          *-  •*  ^  ^  «  •>  "t* 

~*~ 


Occupation   j-)ov>fc-  QJ  .'  fc~ Birthplace  ^*v  S^»»c«'jeot   -*»  '  '  • 

i-       »j   I..-*  ku-'U-J 


Your  spouse___ - ,_. 

/-k.-»'f 


Your  children  Tu •>»«.»  A.  C*>L*~  ,   L^-re,  Co  l»a.h    M* 


Where  did  you  grow  Up? 

Present  community    *->4» h^^C^t^    C^  t.' f- 

Education     ($t\; 


O  a  y 


Occupation  (s)  . 


Areas  of  expertise     <>u  4^^.  ««•<> 


Other  interests  or  activities  T>>' 


J.   N«l;4-i'6.. s 


Organizations  in  which  you  are  active  o«<»  (v^»^'jv»   Muj+y^  0|- 


I      FAMILY  AND  YOUTH 

[Interview   1:     August   17.    1987] 

Childhood   in   Portland,    Oregon 


Morris:        Why    don't  we   start  with  early   influences   on  your  life? 

Sally   L:      As    I   began   to  think  of    this   interview    a  little  last  night  when  I 
went   to  bed  —  particularly   being  desperate,    because   I'd  lost   the 
outline  you  sent  —  I    thought,    oh   my   goodness,    I'm  going  to  fail 
this  exam! 

•> 
Morris:        No,    this   is  not   an  exam. 

Sally  L:      I  know.      I  wondered  —  I'm   not  very    interested  in  the  workings   of   my 
psyche;    I've   never  been  very   interested  in  it.      But    the  minute 
that  you  begin   thinking  about   these    things,    then  you  begin  to 
think  what  were    the   psychological    influences.      I   don't   know   how 
much   of    this   is  interesting  actually   to  you.      Let   me  give  you  an 
example  and  maybe  you  can  answer  me.      It   is  very   clear  in   thinking 
about   it   this  morning,   but   I've   seldom   thought   of    it  before   in  my 
life.      My  mother    [Amy  Dinkelspiel  Lowengart]    gave   two  strong 
messages   in  her  life.      And  they   have   influenced  me  enormously. 
But    I  would   say    it's    psychological    rather    than  anything   else  —  it's 
not   factual    in  a   sense. 

Morris:        Subliminal    almost? 

Sally  L:     Yes,    and  I   don't  know   if   that   sort  of   thing  is   interesting. 

Morris  :        It   is.      It   is   indeed,    particularly   since  you  remember   thinking 
about  your  mother. 

Sally  L:      Yes. 

Morris:        So  what  were  the  two  messages? 


##This   symbol    indicates   that  a   tape   or   a  segment  of  a  tape  has 
begun  or  ended.      For  a   guide   to   the   tapes   see   page  168. 


Sally  L:      Well,    the  two  messages  were:   one  must  be  different  and  yet  one 
must   conform. 

Morris:        That's    sort   of    a   conflicting  message. 

Sally  L:      Yes.      And   it  has   influenced   my  life  enormously.      My   mother,   who 
came   from    San  Francisco,    moved  to  Portland,    Oregon,    was  a  great 
beauty,    and   she  felt  herself   come  from   the   big  city.      Her  husband, 
my   father    [Sanford     Lowengart  j  ,   came  from  what  was  a  substantial 
and  well-known  family  in  Portland.      Her  family,    I  think   she   always 
felt,    was  not  quite  up  to  the  top  of   rich  Jewish  society   in  San 
Francisco.      So  that  makes  it   sort   of   a   dichotomy   in  her   own 
thinking,   because   I   think  although   she  looked  down  her   nose   a  bit 
at   Portland,    Oregon,    at   the   same   time   she  was  rather   a  queen  in 
Portland,    Oregon,    where  here  she  would  have  been  aspiring  to 
greater    social    heights. 

Morris:        An  upper  echelon  that   she  perceived.      Is   the  San  Francisco  Jewish 
community  larger  than  the  Portland  one,    or   older? 

Sally  L:      The  San  Francisco  Jewish  community,    I  think,    is  one  of   the  really 
old  and  prominent  ones   in   the   country.      I   think  it   compares  to — 
I'm  not  very   good  on  Jewish  history   at  all,    but  yes,    I   think 
there's   no  question  about    it.      And,    of    couse,    Portland's   a   much 
smaller  city.      But   people  like   the  Haases  and  Lilienthals  and 
and  Koshlands  and — 

Morris:        — have   been   here  since   the  mid-1800s. 

Sally  L:      That's   right.      And   then  there  were   the  Hellmans  and   the 

Hellers  and  all    these   people.      My    mother's   friends,    I   think, 
in  school  were   the   daughters  and  sons   of   those   people,   but  her 
own  family  was  a  cut  below    in  social   and  economic   terms. 

Isn't  it  awful?      She   never   talked  about  her  family.      For  some 
reason  my   mother's  family   was  very   uninterested  in  their  past.      I 
really   don't  know  how   far  back  it  went.      For  instance,    I    don't   know 
when  her  father  or  grandfather  would  have  emigrated  from  Germany 
or  moved  to  San  Francisco.      I  think  my  grandfather  was   sometimes   a 
successful   businessman,    and  often  he  was  not.      He  was  up  and  down 
in  his  luck,   and   I   imagine  his  wife's   family  was   the   same.     Joe 
and  Sally  Dinkelspiel,    my  grandparents,   were  cousins — second  or 
third    I    believe. 

Morris:        The  way   most   of   us  are  up  and  down  in  our   luck. 

Sally  L:      Most   of   us   are,    except   those  families   that  we're   talking  about. 

like   my    third  husband's   family.      They   were  solid  citizens  forever 
from   the   point   of  view   of  Jewish   society. 

Morris:        Had  your   father's  family   had  connections  with  San  Francisco — ? 


Sally  L:     No,   his    connections  were  in  Portland.      They  were   certainly  one 
of   the  two  or   three  top  Jewish  families.      So  there  was  that 
difference.      My  father's  father  had  moved  there  when  he  was 
teen-aged  or  younger.      His  very   successful   business  was   started 
there.      So  there  was   that   difference.      You  see   the   problems  were 
in  my    mother's  mind. 

Morris:       Right.      Was  your  mother  also  interested  in  the  arts? 

Sally  L:     Well,    that  brings  me  back  to  where  we  started.      The  message  from 
my   mother  was  that  I  had  to  be   creative.      She  was  a  writer,    or, 
rather,    she   thought  of  herself  as  a  writer.      I   don't   think   she   ever 
published  anything  except  a  poem   in  a  tiny  poetry  magazine,    or 
maybe  two.      She  always  thought  of  herself  as  a  writer,    and  she 
always   thought  of   herself  as  more  literary  and  artistic  than 
other   people  in  Portland,    Oregon.      I   don't  really  know    that    she 
was,   but —    [laughs] 

So  _!   was   supposed  to  be   different.      I  was   supposed  to  be   a 
writer  from  the   time   I  was  four  years  old,    or  even  three.      I 
dictated  poems  to  my   governess.     And  they   were  kept.      I  was  to  be 
a  writer. 

My   clothes — I  could  list  all  kinds  of   things  that  were  very 
different   than  my  friends'.      My   clothes  were   sent  from   Paris  by  an 
aunt   of    my    father's.      Much   shorter — way   up  to  here. 

They  were  "chic."     They  were  much   shorter   than  what  the  other 
five-year-olds,    six-year-olds,    seven-year-elds  were  wearing, 
I   imagine. 

I  went   to  a   different   school   than  the  people  in  my 
neighborhood — a   progressive   school — they    don't    call 
them    "progressive"  anymore.      It  actually  is  an  excellent   private 
school   that  is   still  in  existence.      And   I  had  a   governess,    and 
certainly   nobody   else  had  a   governess. 

Morris:       Was  your  mother,    for  her  time,    a  suffragette? 

Sally  L:     No.      No  interest   in  political    things  at  all.      Not  at  all. 

So  you  see  there  was   this   difference   of   always  having  to  be 
different,    and  that  was  a   thread  that  went  through  the  pattern  ©f 
my   life  as  long  as   she  was   alive.      It  went  on  through   college. 

Morris:       Wasn't   that  a  burden  for  a  little  girl? 

Sally  L:      Terrible.      And  it  has   been  a  burden  ever   since.       [laughs] 
Yes,     it  really   was  a   terrible  burden, 

Morris:        Are  you  the  only   daughter? 

Sally  L:     Yes.      Just   one   sibling — older  brother. 


Morris:        Did  he  also  have  to  be   creative  and — 2 

Sally  L:     No. 

Morris:       That's  interesting — 

Sally  L:     And  sexist.      My   mother   took  great  store  in  physical  appearances 
because   she  herself  had  been  just  an  extraordinary   beauty.      And 
she  was  very   interested  in  beauty  and  always  made  me  feel   as  if   1 
were  tremendously  unattractive — had  a  great  deal   to  say  about 
how    unattractive  I  was, which  really  wouldn't  matter  very   much 
except   that  this  was  very  important  in  our  household.      So.    I  had  to 
dress,  quote,  "differently.  "     You  can  imagine  how    one  felt  as  a   child 
dressing  differently    than  other   people. 

So  I've  had  this  problem   all   my   life.      I  want  to  do  both 
things  myself — be  exactly   the   same,  number  one,   and  be   different, 
number   two — or,    more  likely,    number  ten. 

Morris:        How  about  your  father's  influence — what  kind  of  messages   did  he   send? 

Sally  L:     He  adored  me.      He  sent  a  message — from   the  time  I  was  about 

four  years  old  on — that  I  was  a  woman.      A  woman — a  flirtatious   girl 
reacting  to  men.      I   don't  think  that  my   mother  liked  that  very 
well.      My  mother  and  father  really  did  not   get  along — much  later 
got  a  divorce — 

Morris:       Was  it  a  big  shock  to  move  to  San  Francisco,  or  was  this  eagerly 
awaited? 

Sally  L:      I   can't  say   it  was  either  thing,    that   I   can  remember.      There  were 
different   societies  for  a   child.      Those  were   the   days  of 
neighborhoods,    and  I  lived  in  a  neighborhood  in  Portland.      We 
did  all   these  things  together,    but   I  just  felt   slightly   different. 
It's   funny   because   many  years  later,    when  I've  gone  back  and 
seen  those   people,    they   didn't   see  it   that  way  at   all.       [laughs] 

Sally  L:     For  instance    (and  it  was  not  like   my   friends),   we  Lowengarts  went  to 
Europe  for   six  months,  with  our   governess.      It  was  a   different 
style — for  instance,  we  had  a  chauffeur,    and  the  chauffeur,    among 
other   things,    drove  me  to  school.      Hateful!      [laughs] 


Teenager  in  San  Francisco 


Morris:       Was  that  pattern  different  when  you  moved  to  San  Francisco? 

Sally  L:     Not  originally — this  was  really   because   my  mother   couldn't  tell 

the  wonderful  nurse  we  had.  who'd  been  with  us  for  so  long  and  was 
so  fond  of  us.  that  she  had  to  leave.  So  I  still  had  a  nurse  when 
I  came  here. 


Morris :        The   same   devoted — 

Sally  L:     The  same   devoted  nurse,    yes.      Even  though   that  was  after   the  De 
pression,   and  the  Depression  really  was  very,  very  hard  on  my  family. 

Morris:       Because   of   the  European  connections? 

Sally  L :     No,    because,    I   guess,    of   my   father's   investments — I    don't   know.      You 
know,  in  those   days  people  never  talked  about  money.      Particularly 
not  to   children,    even   probably  to  each  other.      It  was  never  men 
tioned.      You  asked  in  this  outline,    though,    about — and  I   tried  te 
give  it  a  little   thought — charitable   giving  and  so  forth.       I 
think  that  my  parents  somehow,    particularly  my   father,    inculcated 
in  us  a  feeling  that  one  does   give  to   charity.      However,    I    don't 
remember   ever   even, quote,  "helping  the  poor."     I  was  trying  to  recall 
what   civic  work  they  did.      My  father  at  one  point  was  president  of 
temple  guild,    although  my   parents  were  not  religious.      I  don't 
ever  remember  them   going  to  temple  except  on  High  Holidays.      I  had 
to   go   to  Sunday   school   for  a  year  or   two.      Other  than  that  I  don't 
remember — they  must  have  given  money  to  what  was  then   called  the 
community   chest. 

Morris:       Which  was  just   getting  started. 

Sally  L:      It  was  just   getting  started,    yes. 

Morris:        That's  around  World  War    I  in  San   Francisco. 

Sally  L:     That  would  be  just  about   right.     But   I  had  no  idea  what  people  did 
about   philanthropy.      It  would  be  interesting  to  read  what  they   did 
tend  to  do.      We  know    something  about  people  like  the  Mellons  or 
the  Rockefellers — but  I  mean  ordinary  well-off  families. 

Morris:       Right,    but  you  did  not  get  involved  in  passing  cookies  at  charity 
bazaars   and    things. 

Sally  L:     No.      Not  at  all. 

Morris:       Were  there  any  people  or   things   special   about  your  early  teen 
years  in  San  Francisco? 

Sally  L:     Oh  yes.      Again  I  was   coming  to  a  place  where  I  felt  like  an  out 
sider.      My   father  wanted  me  to   go  Burke's  school.      It  was  very, 
very   difficult   to  get  into  Burke's,  actually,  because   I  think  it  was 
very  anti-Semitic,    but,    of   course,    I   didn't  know    that  at   the    time. 
But  he  knew   a  Mr.   Dohrman  who  got  me  in;  but  you  see.    it  wasn't 
just   going  to  school,    it  was    getting  one  into  a  school.      And  there, 
as  it   said  in  that  article  that  you  read.    I  wrote  a  note — * 


*See  Ruth  Arnstein  Hart,   Concern  for  the   Individual,   Regional  Oral 
History   Office.    University   of   California,    Berkeley,    1978,   p.    42. 


Sally  L:      Yes,    I  had  an  elder  brother  who  I  absolutely  adored,   just 

idolized.      He'd  sometimes  teach  me   dirty   words,    [laughs],   heaven — 
pure  heaven! 

See,    here  I  still  was  with  a  governess  and  with  these  very 
short   skirts — it's  too    ghastly  te   think  about.      The   girls  were 
probably   two  years  older   than  I.      I  kept   skipping  grades. 

Morris:       Were  your  friends,  Ruth    [Arnstein  Hart],    Carol    [Walter  Sinton]   at 
Miss  Burke1  s  tee? 

Sally  L:     Ruth   wasn't  at  Burke's.   you  see.      It  was   Carol  who  was 

probably   my  first   close  friend — I'm  sure   she  was;   she  too  had 
a  nurse. 

Morris:        So  you  had  somebody  who  understood  the  pluses  and  minuses  of — ? 

Sally  L:      Yes.     Actually  somehow   that  all  worked.      My  nurse  went   back  to 
Switzerland  finally.      So  it  didn't  last. 

The  girls  in  that   class  were  many   generations  older   than  I, 
although  in  reality   only  two  years,    and  they   were  reading  dirty 
books   behind  other   covers,   you  see:   books  about   sex.      So  they  knew 
about  all   these   things — well,    the  difference  between  being  a 
highly  protected  twelve  year-eld  and  being  in  the  big  city  at 
thirteen  and  fourteen!      So  when  I  passed  this  note,    as  Ruth  said, 
I  was  summarily  fired. 

Morris:       They   were  very  stern. 

Sally  L:     They   were  very  stern.     It  really  was  very  anti-Semitic,   that  class. 
I  remember  whatever  history  we  were  studying,   if  there  was  any 
question  that  had  to  do  with  Israel  or  Jews,    this  teacher  would 
turn  to  me  and  say,    "Now.   you  know   all  about  Jews.11     Though  Carol 
was  Jewish.      I  don't  think  that  there  were  ether  Jewish  girls  in 
the   class,    but   Carol's  two  older   sisters  had   gone   there,    and 
they're  very   charitable  to  the  school   and  se  forth. 

Morris:       Did  you  and  Carol  live  in  the   same  neighborhood,   in  Pacific  Heights? 

Sally  L:     Actually,    yes. 

Morris:       Did  many   people  go   to  boarding  school? 

Sally  L:     No.      Although  I   did  eventually.      There  were  other   things  that  made 
me  feel   like   an  outsider.      For  instance,   we  all  went  to  dancing 
class — a  Jewish   dancing  class.       It's  funny   to   think   of    things 
being  so   segregated.      Strange.      Coming  from   Portland,    you  see, 
where   they  were  not   segregated  at  all.     Going  to  a   dance  and   being 
told  to  wear  old  clothes,    and  my   mother  decking  me  out   in  a  maroon 
satin   evening  dress — and   everybody    else  wore   blue  jeans.      I  was 
taller    than  everybody    else.      Oh,    dreadful  1      Dreadful,    dreadful, 
dreadful  years  I       [hoots] 


Morris:        It   sounds  like   it  may  have  been  difficult  to  communicate  with  your 
mother  on  some   of   these  realities. 

Sally  L:     Oh,    really   truly   said.      Yes.    we  were  very   different   characters.    I 
think. 

Morris:       Did  you  have  a  say   in  going  to  Sarah  Lawrence? 

Sally  L:     Yes.    that  was  of  course  much  later.     After   I  was  expelled  from 

Burke1  s,    I  went   to  public  schools,    and  that's  where  I   got  to  knew 
Ruth  so  well,    because  we  both  went  to  Roosevelt  Junior  High 
School.      Then  we  went  to  Galileo    [High  School].     After  a  year  of 
never  opening  a  book  at  Galileo,   maybe  longer,    I  was   sent  to  Santa 
Barbara  Girls  School,    where  I  went  for  two  years.      And  that  was 
boarding  school. 

Morris:        Why    didn't  you  open  a  book  at  Galileo? 

Sally  L:     Because   I   guess   I  was  rebellious,    and  you  didn't  need   to.      You 
could   get  all   A's   and  not  open  a  book — 

Morris:        Did  you  and  Ruth  and   Carol  have  a  pact  to   see  how  long  you  could 
get   through  without  reading — ? 

Sally  L:     No,    Carol  was  at  Burke's.      And  after   I  was  expelled,    her  mother 
wouldn't  let  her   speak  to  me. 

Morris:        You  were  expelled,    but   she  was  not. 

Sally  L:     Well,    I  wrote  the  note.      This  is  all   extraneous — but  many  years 
later,   when  I  was  a  freshman  at   college,    the   president   came  out 
to   give   a  presentation  about   Sarah  Lawrence   for  prospective  parents. 
There  was  a  film  of   the  school  and  it   described  how   Sarah  Lawrence 
had  something  called   "contracts"  rather   than  exams  or  papers. 

And   Connie  Warren,    the   president  of   the   college,    picked  me 
out  of   the  crowd  of   people  to  ask,    "Sally,  you  were  a  freshman  this 
year.      What  was  your  contract  about?     What  was  you  major   contract?" 
And  I   said  it  was  the  possible  influences  of  Freud  on  Karl  Marx 
and  vice  versa.     And  from   the  back  of   the  room   came  Barbara 
Burke's  voice,    "I    could  have   told  you  about   that   girl."      [laughs] 
It's  really  funny,    because   I   then  became,    through  college  and 
afterwards,    a  solid  citizen.     And  whenever  I  met  her  at  a   solid- 
citizen   party,    a   civic   group  of   some   sort,    she  literally  turned 
away.       [laughs] 

Morris:       You  were  marked  for  life  because   of   that  one  indiscretion.      It 
makes  one  wonder — I  assume  that  sex  education  was  not  mentioned 
at  Burke's. 

Sally  L:     Oh,    heavens,    I   can't  imagine  it  was.      And  at  home,    my   mother 
always  said  that   sex  was  extremely   dirty — disgusting  in  fact, 
[laughs] 


8 


II  SARAH  LAWRENCE    CCLLBGE.    1936-1940 


Eastern  College  Expectations 


Morris:       How   had  you  heard  about  Sarah  Lawrence? 

Sally  L:     When   I  went  to  Santa  Barbara  Girls  School,    my  first  boyfriend's 
sister-in-law   lived  in  San  Francisco.      He  came  up  to  see  me  over 
Easter  vacation,   and   I  went  to  this   grown-up   couple's — they  were 
about  21   or  22  years  old — house  for  dinner,   and  they   treated  me 
like  an  equal.      Imagine!      They   didn't  make  me   sit  at  the 
children's   table.      They   had  a   baby.      Oh,    I   mean  it  was   thrilling. 
And  she  was  witty,   warm,   and  had  gone  there.      I  think  that  was 
what  made  me  focus  on  Sarah  Lawrence. 

Morris:        Were  you  interested  in   going  east? 

Sally  L:     Definitely   interested  in  going  east.      But   in  those   days,    there  was 
almost  no  limit.      If  you  were  in  the  highest   seventh  of   the   class 
then  you  could   go   to  anyone   of    the  "sister   colleges."    Until   I 
think   I  met  Dale   Clyde.    I  was   going  to   go  to  Vassar  or  Wellesley. 

Then,    having  become  interested  in  Sarah  Lawrence,    and,    I 
suppose,   writing  away  for  information  they   sent  out,    I  tried  to 
fit  myself  more  into  the  picture  of  what  would  be  a  Sarah  Lawrence 
girl.     That  you  see.   again  fitted  into  what   my  mother  liked  on  one 
side   of    her:    creative,    and  artistic,    and  different.      Different  is 
the  word  that  was   used  a  whole  let. 

Morris:        Did  Dale   (Hyde   fit  your  idea  of   different,    as  well  as  being 
friendly  and  welcoming? 

Sally  L:     Yes.      Interesting. 

Morris:       Okay,     interesting  means   "different,"  or   the  result  of   being 
different  is   that  you're  interesting? 

Sally  L:      [pauses]      I    don't  know.       It   probably  didn't   go   beyond  being  friendly, 
elder,   and  interested  in  books  and  world  events.      My   best  friends — 
Ruth  and  my   other  Jewish  friend  in  San  Francisco — were  not  at  all 


Sally  L:     academic.      Ruth  wasn't  even  slightly  academic.      Not  a  bit.    She 
went  to  more  of  a  finishing  school.      And  I  was  much  mere 
interested  in  things  like  reading,    although   I  was  never  academic. 

Morris:        Was  your  reading  on  the  school-approved  list  er  did  you  pursue 
this  on  your   own? 

Sally  L:     I    really   don't  remember,    but   I   don't  think  I  had  any   academic 
interests  at  all.     But   I  was   definitely  more  interested  in 
going  to  college.      The  girls  that  I  knew   here   (and  by   that  time, 
of   course   I  had  been  at  boarding  school   for  two  years)  led  such 
a — sort  of   a  narrow   life.      They   expected  to  get  married  and  have 
children  and  not   think  about   college.      In  fact,    I    don't   think 
many    of    them   did  go   to  college.      Carol,    for  instance,    didn't  go   to 
college. 

Morris:        So  you  were  the  only   San  Francisco   girl   when  you  got  to  Sarah 

Lawrence? 

Sally  L:     No.      There  was  a   girl   I  knew,    actually  there  was  another — 

[pauses]      Funnily  enough,    Jim  Hart's  wife,    Connie.      She  only  went 
one  year.      She  was  totally  non-academic.      Anyhow,    I  don't  really 
know  what  the  influence  was,    but  it  just   sounded  exciting  and 
interesting.      The  president  at  that  time  was  a  New  England  lady 
named  Constance  Warren, who  believed  in  progressive  education     but 
who  wore  white  gloves     and  a   tailored  suit.      She  was  about  65  years 
old  and  very   proper.      She   came  to   see  my   parents  about  the  schools 
and  quickly  disproved  their  ideas  about  what  education  at  a  place 
of   that   sort  might  be.     Because  already  its  reputation  was 
beginning  to  spread  and  about  how   independent  its  students  were 
and  how   un traditional. 


Literary   Exposure 


Morris:       Did  you  find  that  the  academic  work  was  more  satisfying  or  was 
satisfying, once  you   get  into  it  at  Sarah  Lawrence? 

Sally  L:     Sarah  Lawrence  at  that  time,    which  is  not  true  anymore,    was 

undemanding  in  that  education  was  so  individualized  that  I   could 
go   through   college   by   writing  stories.      I  was   supposed  to  be  a 
writer. 

There  was  no  choice   in  my   career.      I  had  to  be   a  lady   and  a 
writer.     And  definitely  was  net  to  have   sex  with  a  man  before   I 
got  married.      Those  were  the  three  rules  in  my   life.      Oh.    dear. 
It  is  funny. 

Morris:        So  did  you  do  a  lot  of  writing? 


10 


Sally  L:      So  I   did.      But  I   didn't  learn  very   much,    and   I've  regretted   this 
terribly  all   my   life.      Actually   Sarah  Lawrence  was  a  good  and 
bad  influence  on  me   because   I  never  learned  to  take  notes;  I 
never  vent   t©    a  lecture — they  didn't  have   lecture  courses   in  those 
days.      I  learned  to  be   something  called   creative  but  never 
learned  facts  or   theories  or  history   or   science   er  anything 
else. 

Morris:       Looking  back  on  it.    were  you  thinking  in  terms  of   finding  a  little 
discipline,    or  intellectual — ? 

Sally  L:     I   didn't  think  I  was  then.      I  think  I  was  looking  in  terms  of 

finding  the  right  man, actually.      [laughs]      And  fitting  in.      I  went 
east,    and  I  was  one   of  the  few  westerners  at  Sarah  Lawrence,    and  I 
didn't  know   anybody  in  the  east.      I  was  Jewish — that  was  in  those 
days  eastern  colleges  were  very  anti-Semitic,    although  Sarah 
Lawrence  less   so  than  others.      But   I  had  one  after  another 
demeaning  experience. 

M 

Sally  L:     There  were  a  lot  of   smart  people  there,    but  for  somebody   from 

"*  the  west  who  felt  insecure  anyway,   it  was  not  a  place  that   gave 
one   much   security.      In  fact,    I'm  very   close   to  Sarah  Lawrence.      I 
served  on  the   board  for  a  long  time,   and   I  have  been  a  buddy   of 
one   after  another  president  of   Sarah  Lawrence,    and  my  daughter 
went  there.     Actually,    it  is  isolated  for  some  reason  or  another — 
shouldn't  be;    it's  only   thirty   minutes  from  New   York.      So,    again, 
I  felt  rather — 

You  asked  me  about  academia,    and  I'm  not  answering  you 
directly  which  is   unfortunate,   but   I  would   say,    if  anybody 
asked,    *Vhat  was  the  greatest  influence   on  your  life?"     I 
would   say,    "Sarah  Lawrence."     In  fact,     I  have   often   said   so 
since    I   don't  know   whether  it's  true   today,    but  it  certainly 
came  through  in  those  days,    that  you  could  learn  what  you 
wanted  to  in  order  to  do  what  you  wanted  to  do.      At  least 
I   came  out  with   that  feeling.      I   don't  know    that   I  even 
thought   about    it> 

Morris:        And  it   sounds  like   it  also  gave  you  a  lot  of   self-confidence. 

Sally  L:     Well,    I  never  I  had  any  self-confidence,   but  it  gave  you  the 

feeling  that  if  you  worked  hard  you  could  do  anything  you  wanted. 
Anybody   could. 


Pol  i  ti  cal    Cur  rents;     Lincoln  Brigade   and  Anti-Semitism 


Morris:        That's  marvelous.      Did  you  think  of   staying  on  the  East   Coast 
after   graduation? 


11 


Sally  L:      Oh, yes,    I   did.      Also,    politically  too.      Sarah  Lawrence  had  a   great 
influence   politically.      But  as  far  as   staying  on  the  East   Coast,    I 
desperately  wanted  to   stay  en  the  East   Coast.      I   got  a  jeb  at 
Harper's,  which  was  oh,    God,    wonderfull     But   I   couldn't  take  it 
because  my   parents  made  me   come  home. 

Morris:       Oh,  dear.      Let's   go   back  and   do   the   political    influence. 

Sally  L:     Well,    of  course,    this  was  1936,   and  what  was  happening  in 

Germany — through   the  period  that  I  was  there,    what  was  happening 
in  Europe  was  a   passionate  interest.      Although  our  social  lives — 
it's  very   strange   again — there  was  a   dichotomy,    because  people 
drank  like   unbelievable.      We'd   go  to  men's    colleges   on   the 
weekends — that  was  the  whole  purpose  of  life.      People  would 
compete  to  see  who  could  pass  out.      I  mean,    it  was   incredible.      On 
the  other  hand,    during  those  four  years  the  Lincoln  Brigade  was 
going  to  Spain,   and  some  of  our  friends  were   going  from   Princeton 
and  got  killed.      I   guess  by   my  junior  year,    every   Thursday  night 
we  had  a   cheap   dinner.  We  had  carrot  and  raisin  salad.    I  remember, 
instead  of  meat,    and  macaroni  or  something,    and  the  money  went  to 
the  Lincoln  Brigade.      This  was  at  Sarah  Lawrence. 

Morris:        College-wide  decision? 

Sally  L:     Whoever  made   the  decision,    I  don't  know.      I  can't  imagine     that  it 
was   Connie    [Warren]    though.      I    don't   know. 

Morris:       Was  there  a  student  government? 

Sally  L:     Yes.    there  was  a  student  government,    but  it  was  of  no  importance 
at  all.      Those  were  the  days  that  it  was  all  right,    as  you  very 
well  know    (and  not  only  at  Sarah  Lawrence  but  other  places,    and   I 
think  fewer  at  Sarah  Lawrence  because  most  people  were  highly 
protected  folk),   to   carry  a   card  of   the   Communist   party.      That  was 
true   of   all   colleges  and  universities  with  which   I  am  familiar. 

Morris:       Had  many  of   the   girls — ? 
Sally  L:     Not  that  I  know   of   there. 
Morris:        Cautious  about  it — 

Sally  L:     Whether   they   were  or  not,    I  doubt  that  they   were,   Gabrielle,      but 
I  know   a  very,   very  prominent  judge  who   died  a   couple   of  years  ago 
who  was  a  member  of   the  Communist  party  when  he  went  to  Cal.      I 
mean,    there  are  a  lot  of  other   people  who  at  the   time — that's 
before  the  war,    after  all.      The  Russians  were  still   heroes  in  eur 
minds,    I   guess.      I   don't  even  remember  anything  about  Russia. 

Morris:       The  Lincoln  Brigade   seems  to  have  had  an  emotional  appeal   separate 
from   the  Russians. 


12 


Sally  L:      Oh,    totally.      It  was  anti-fascist, 
to  do  with  Russia  at  all. 


I    don't   think  it  had  anything 


Morris:       John  Reed  came  from   Portland.     Did  he  register  en  your 
consciousness? 


Sally  L:     No,    no.      Interesting  people  came  from   Portland.      They   certainly 
had  liberal   political   or   even  radical  views.      But   since   I  wasn't 
interested  in  politics  or  history   or  anything  useful,    that  must 
have  just   sifted  through  my   consciousness.     And  my   best 
friends   there  weren't  interested  in  such  matters. 


Morris : 


Sally  L: 


Morris : 


Did  the  Lincoln  Brigade  appeal   to  you  because  young  men  that  you 
knew  were — ? 

It  appealed  to  everybody.      This  was   simply  what  the  school   did.      I 
did  happen  to  know   one  person  from  Princeton  who  went   there — but 
wasn't  a   close   friend,    no.      It  is  interesting.      I  wish 
I   could  pin  it   down.      People  have   often  asked  me,    certainly  at 
Sarah  Lawrence,    but  I  can't — 

Do  you  suppose  that  it  was   the  influence  and  leadership  of   some   of 
the  faculty? 


Sally  L :     Absolutely,    absolutely. 
Morris:       Who  might  it  have  been? 

Sally  L:      My   own  don.      At  Sarah  Lawrence   there  were  dons.      It's  a  little 

different  now,    tightened  up  somewhat,    but  then  one  would  see   the 
don  every   week  for   two  hours.    I  think,    and  he  would  guide  your 
academic,   as  well  as,    if  you  wished,   your   emotional  and  social 
life.      [laughs]     And  my   den,   whom   I  had  for   three  years  at  Sarah 
Lawrence  was  so  close  a  friend  that  he  was  just  the  biggest 
influence,  on  my   life. 

He  was  a  writer.      His  name  was  Max  Geismar.     He  was  just 
ideal  for  what  a  young  woman  would  think  was  ideal.      He  had  a 
permanent   pipe   coming  out   of  his  handsome,    thin  face,    and  patches 
on  his   tweed  elbows.     He  was   sardonic  and  brilliant,  just 
absolutely    full   of   charm.      He  was  a  writer,   you  see.    and  he'd  say, 
"Don't   be   a  writer.      It's  a   terrible    profession.      You  must   not    be 
a  writer,   you  must  be   a — "     So,    of   course,    it  would   make — 

Morris:        It  would  make  you  want  to  be  one. 

Sally  L:     Oh,    of   course.     And  he  certainly  was   someone  who  had  radical 
political  views,    although  I  know   that  because  I  know  what  he 
wrote,    and  I  know    of  what  he  did  since  that  time  and  his 
involvements.      But   I   don't  remember  anything  he   ever   said,   you 
see.     directly. 

Morris:        Or   that  he  was   somebody    involved  in  this   carrot  and  raisin  salad — ? 


13 


Sally  L:     No,    I  wouldn't — I   don't   know  who  or  what  was.     But  there  was  just 
generally   that  feeling,    at  least  it  came  wafting  down  to  me.      My 
friends  at  Sarah  Lawrence  were  not  necessarily  interested  in 
political   matters  at  all.      But  it  did  take  with  me. 

Now,    the  other   thing  I   should  have   said  is  that,    ef   course, 
being  a  Jew,    and  what  was  happening  in  1938 — Jews  were  moving  out, 
and  they   certainly  were  moving  against  the  Jews — so  of   course. 
that  was  an  enormous  thing  in  my  life,    although  I  imagine  not 
talked  about  very  much.      My  parents  were  very  involved;    my  father 
was  involved  in  getting  Jewish   relatives  out  of  Germany. 

But  at  Sarah  Lawrence  as   a  Jew,    that  feeling  of  here   I  am, 
horrible  things  happening,    was  a  really  important  thing  in 
my  life — and  not  talked  about.      Perhaps  it  was  talked  about  to  Max 
Geismar  or   to  another  professor,    but   not  to  my   friends.      None   ef 
whom  were  Jewish.     None   of  whom  had  those  interests.     So,    this  was 
a  kind  of    disguise.      You  certainly   weren't  hiding  the  fact  that 
you  were  Jewish,    of   course,   but  felt  it  was  always  a  big  thing  in 
my   life — very,    very  big  thing  in  my   life. 

Morris:        Part   of   the   sense   of   feeling  different  and — ? 

•% 
Sally  L:     Feeling  different,   because   people  looked  down  on  Jews,    and  I 

had  one  after  another  dreadful  anti-Semitic  experience  really — 
and  then  the  awful    thing  of  being  at   a  party  or   something  and 
someone  saying  something  derogatory  about  Jews,   and  my  not 
speaking  up   and   saying,    "But    I'm  Jewish;  don't   say    that."     Then 
feeling   guilty.      Isn't   that  funny.      Just    saying   that   I   haven't 
thought  of   it  for  a  long  time,   but   I  mean,    I  feel   the  guilt  right 
now ! 

Morris:        What  do  you  do? 

Sally  L:     What  do  you  do?      And  then  you  do  it.      I  can  remember  instances 
when   I  did   say,    "I'm  Jewish,"  and  having   someone  get  up 
at  a   formal    dinner   table  and  say,    "I've  never   sat  next   to  a 
Jew  and  never  will,"     or   that  kind  of   thing —  or  being  in  a   car 
with  lots  of  kids  in  Nashville  when  I  was  visiting  my  roommate, 
and  everybody   stopping  in  a  nightclub,    as  they  had  in  those   days 
out  in  the  country.      There  was  a  lighted  sign   saying,    "No  Niggers 
or  Jews   allowed."     And  I   didn't   say   then  to   the   ten   people  in  the 
car,  "No,    we  can't  go  here  because  I'm  Jewish." 

Morris:  That  would  be  a  terrible  feeling. 

Sally  L:  So  all   this   goes  back  to — 

Morris:  So  that  the  news  of  what  was  going  en  in  Germany  was — 

Sally  L:  [unclear  words],    yes. 

Morris:  — been  very,  very    personal. 


14 


Sally  L:      Yes.   it  was  not   because   of  relatives  really,   but  it  was  very 

personal.      Yes.    again,    because   it's  a   split  feeling,    a   dichotomy. 
Difficult,    I   think,    because,    here   I'm   a  Jew  and  it's  not  happening 
to  me.  but  also  I'm  not  a  Jew  because  I'm  trying  not  to  be  a  Jew. 
I  mean.    I'm  not  trying  not  to  be  a  Jew,  but  I'm  sort  of   a 
disguised  person.      You  see.    people  didn't  recognize  me  as  Jewish 
from  my  name  or  face.      I  always  had  to  tell   that   I  was  Jewish  to 
non-Jews.     Although  a  Jew   might  know   that  I  was  Jewish  because  my 
name  was  Lowengart. 

Morris:        It's  also  German  then? 

Sally  L:  It's  also  German,  and  so  I  would  always  have  to  tell.  I  think  all 
that  influenced  my  political  life  later,  that's  why  I'm  going  into 
all  that,  yes. 


One-on-One  Teaching 


Morris:        Were  there  other  people  on  the  faculty  besides  Max  Geismar  who 
were  helpful  or  open  to — ? 

Sally  L:     Oh,   yes.      The  most  fantastic  faculty.      Not  in  political   ways,    for 
instance,   but   there  were   great  literary  luminaries.      There  was  a 
poet;   his  name  was  Horace  Gregory;   he  was       great.      And  a  Marxist, 
woman  author  named  Genevieve  Taggard  who  led  the  May  Day  parade 
every  year  in  New   York  City. 

It's   unbelievable   to  think  that  there  were  four   students  in 
a  seminar  with  four  professors,    if  you  can  believe  it.    and   I  was 
one   of   them.      Can  you  believe  it?      I'm  ashamed  to  even  think  of 
how  wasted  the  teachers  were.      Horace  Gregory  and  Genevieve 
Taggard  were  among  them.      I  think  Max  may  have  been  one  of   them, 
and  then  there  was  a  fourth  writer  whose  name   I   can't  remember. 

Morris:       And  were  you  one   of   the  four  students? 

Sally  L:      Oh.    yes.      I  wrote   stories  for   the  teachers  to   critique.      The 
reason  I   remember   this  is  because  you  said,    'Look  through   and 
see  if   don't  you  have  any  mementos."     So   I  went  through   my    desk — 

Morris:       Did  you  save   some   of   those   stories? 

Sally  L:      I  have   a  whole  file   of   the   stories,    yes. 

Morris:       Good   for  you.       They're   painful    to  read,    aren't   they? 

Sally  L:      I   didn't  read   them,    because    I  was  in  a  hurry  looking  for   other 
mementoes. 


15 


Morris:        Don't  throw    them   away   though.      I   don't  need  them.       [phone  rings   in 

background]      That  would  be   unduly  prying,    but  your  children  would  be 
enchanted  with   them. 

Sally  L:  Well,  there  they  are.  They've  been  sitting  there  for  years.  Se. 
you  see  these  marks  all  ever — I  mean,  how  carefully  these  devoted 
teachers  read  them.  Oh!  [laughs]  Too  aw  full 

Morris:       What  an  incredible  experience. 

Sally  L:      It  was  an  incredible  experience.      And  then  there  was  a  very,   very 
well-known  composer  and  teacher.     His  name  was  S  chum  an,   who  went 
from    there  to  be   the  head  of   the  Juilliard  School  of  Music — very, 
very   famous   composer   still   today.     Anyway,   he  led  us  in   chorus, 
and  my   don.    Max,    said  I   didn't  know    anything  about  music.      And  in 
fact,    I  wasn't  a   bit   interested.      So  Max  said,    "Well,    you'd   better 
learn  something  about  music."     So,    Franz    Schuman,    once-a-week  for 
I   don't  know  how  many  months,   met  me  at  the  Brenxville  tavern  to 
talk  about  music.      Mostly  what  he  told  me  was  how   much  he  hated 
Wagner,   and  how  he  had  to —    [laughs]     We  were  surrounded  by   these 
absolutely  wonderful   minds. 

Morris:  Incredible.      You  really  would   get  an  appreciation  for — 

Sally  L:  — for  the  fun  of  knowing  something — 

Morris:  And  talking  to   people  like   that   on  a   one-to-one   basis. 

Sally  L:  Yes,    just   talking,    yes. 

Morris:  It   sounds  like   they  were  approachable  and  accessible. 

Sally  L:  Oh,  very. 

Morris:       That's   really   striking  when  you  think  of   the  concerns  for   the 
last  twenty  years  of   students  that  the  Great   I  Am  may   be  an 
incredible  brain,   but   he's  lecturing  to  a   class  of   two 
hundred,   and  you   don't  really  have  any    sense   of    personal    contact. 

Sally  L:     Right.      And  the  Great   I  Am  is  usually  not  teaching 

undergraduates  at  a  place  like   the  University   of   California. 
God  knows,    at  Harvard  they   were.     But  that  was  very   different 
then.      I  mean  I've   compared  notes  with  Phil    [Lilienthal] ,    for 
instance,    since   then,    how    close  he  was  even  to  his  Harvard 
professors. 


Phil  Lilienthal    in  New  York 


Morris:       He  was  at  Harvard  when  you  were  at — 


16 


Sally  L:     He  had  just   graduated  when   I  went  to  Sarah  Lawrence. 

Morris:       Did  your   don  or  anybody   else   suggest  that  you  do  something  with 
the   other  arts?      In  other  words,    that  you  get  your  hands  into 
clay—? 

Sally  L:     Yes.    he  did.      I   took  a   painting  course  when  I  was  a  freshman.      It 
was  just  terrible.      Thirty  years  later  when  I  was  on  the   board 
at  Sarah  Lawrence   I  was  asked  by  the  then  president  to  do 
something  about  the  art  department  which  needed  complete 
revamping.      And  the  teacher  was  the  same  terrible  teacher 
who  spent  his  life  trying  to  keep  the   studio   clean  when 
I  was  a  freshman.      He's   still   there.       [laughs]      It  was  funny, 
you  see.      Anyway.    I   stayed  in  the   painting  courses   a  very, 
very   short  time.      I  was  not  interested  in  art  at  Sarah 
Lawrence,  which  is  kind  of  interesting  considering  that   I 
spent   the  next   twenty  years  being  a   sculptor.      In  fact,    as 
to  the  cultural  riches  of  New  York — I  believe   I  went  to  a 
museum   twice   in  four  years.      Both  times  taken  by — once  by 
Phil  and  once  by  another  man.    neither  of  whom  had  enough  money 
to  take   me  out   on  a  more  expensive  date.      [laughs] 

Can  you  believe  it — being  in  New   York? 

But  really,  from   Sarah  Lawrence  we  were  only  allowed  to 
stay   in  two  hotels,    and  the  hotels   cost   six  dollars  a   night, 
which  was  a   rate  for  colleges.      (I   imagine  it  was  eight 
dollars   for   other    people.)      [laughs]      We'd   go   out — we'd    get 
six  of   us  who  would  go  and  stay   in  the  one  room  because  the 
managers   didn't  know  who   came  to  visit  in  the  room.     We'd 
sleep  across  a   double  bed,    and  whoever  lost  pulling  the 
matchsticks  had  to   sleep  in  the   bathtub.      Imagine  all  for 
six  dollars. 

Morris:        Did  Phil   stay  in  the  East? 

Sally  L:     No.      That  year  that  I  met  him  he  was  in  the  East  working. 
miserably   unhappily  in  the  insurance  business.      After 
graduating  from   college,    he  had  been  going,    expecting  to  go 
into  graduate  school  and  become  an  academic,    although  he 
always   said  afterwards   that  he  was  glad  that  he  did  not  do 
so.      His  father  died  and  his  mother  made  him   come  back  to 
San  Francisco;   so  then  the  following  year — and  by   that  time 
we  were  in  love,   more  or  less — he  took  his  small   patrimony 
and   spent   a  year  on  his  own  in  adventures  in  Asia.      That's 
how  he  became  so  involved  in  Asia   studies.      So  then  when  he 
returned,   we  broke   up  and — 

Morris:        Then  many  years  later  you  did  marry. 

Sally  L:     Well,    many  years  later,   yes.      Not  that  many  years  later   I  was 
working  for  the   Office   of  War   Information. 


17 


III     WITH   THE  OFFICE  OF  WAR   INFORMATION.    1941-1946 


Family   Troubles.    1940;   Advertising  Job 


Morris:       Right.      How   did  you  get  connected  with  the  Office  of  War 
Information?     What  were  they  doing  in   San  Francisco? 

Sally  L:     That's  a   good  question,      Because  it  was  the  western  office  from 
which  broadcasts  were   sent  by   short  wave  to  Asia.      The  New   York 
OWI  broadcast  around  to  Assam,    and  from   San  Francisco  we  broadcast 
around  to  Assam   the   other  way. 

Morris:       Good  heavens.      So  you  were  preparing  material    that  was  then 

translated  into  Asian  languages.      Did  you  have  to  take  a    civil 
service   exam,    or  go  through   security? 

Sally  L:     No,  no.     You'd  think  so,  but  no.     I  can't  imagine  anybody 
listening  to  any   of   it — 

How    I   got  into  it  in  the  first  place?     As   I  said  earlier,    I  was 
teld  by   my   parents  to  come  home  to  San  Francisco.      It   seemed  a 
real    tragedy   to  come  home,   but   I  was  forced  to. 

Morris:       Because  the  daughter  alone  in  New   York  was  just — ? 

Sally  L:     No,    no.      Because  my   mother  wanted  me  to  be  at  home.      My   mother 

always  was  always  in  very  bad  health,    both  emotional  and  physical. 
Whatever   I   did  against  her   strong  wishes  made  her  ill.      She  had 
to  go  to  bed  and  sometimes  she  was  seriously   sick  because   of   my 
obstinancy.      So  therefore  I  had  to  come  home  after  college   or  ruin 
her  health  permanently.      That  was  in  June,   and  the  following 
November,    my  brother  got  married.      The  day  after  the  wedding  my 
father  told   my  mother  that  he  was  leaving  her.      So  then,    I  was 
really   stuck.      Noway   out  1 

Morris:       What  a  horrendous  year.      This  is   all   in  1940? 
Sally  L:     Yes.       So  I  was   stuck  there  until   I   got  married. 


18 


Morris:        That's  a   strong  reason  to   get  married. 

Sally  L:     I  didn't  for  years. 

Morris:       But   it  was  all   right  to  go  out  and  start  a  career,    go   to  work? 

Sally  L:     Well,    if  I  was  not  getting  married.     Actually   my  mother  made  it 

very   clear  that  she  did  not  want  me   to  get  married  and  leave  her. 
I  was  responsible  for  her  and  without  me   she  would  be  alone. 

Morris:       But  you  were  also  supposed  t«  grow   up  and  be  a  writer  and  get 
married. 

Sally  L:     And  be   a  writer  as  you  said.      Although  what  I  wrote   she  didn't 

approve  of  at  all.     So.   I  had  to  do  something.  I  guess.     I  don't 
think  I  was  encouraged  to  have  a  career.      But   I  felt  I  had  to  get 
a  job   certainly,    but   I  wasn't   particular  encouraged  nor  was   I 
discouraged. 

Since   I  had  not  been  able  to  take   the  job  at  Harper's   in 
publishing,    the  next  best   thing  was  advertising.     At   that   time 
there  was  no  trade   publishing  in  San  Francisco.      So  I  went  to 
secretarial  school  to  learn  to  type.      My  beau  at  the   time  was  in 
advertising,    I  believe  at  Roos  Brothers.       [laughs]      He  later 
became  the  head  of  John  Deere   Company.      Anyway  I   got  a  job  for  $75 
a  month   in  an  advertising  firm.      Then  when  the  war  broke  out,    I 
left  to  work  for  what  was   called  the  "war  effort." 

But   before  all   that,    in  1940  when  I  first  came  home — I  do 
like  to  tell  this  story — my  father  told  me  that  if   I  voted  for 
Roosevelt,    or  if   I  kept  the  little  kitten  I  brought  home  with  me. 
I  would  have  to  leave   the  house.      Of   course,    my   children  wouldn't 
live  at  home  after  they   graduated  from   college.      Unheard  of   today, 
but  in  those   days,   isn't  that   strange?       It's  hard  for  me   to 
believe.      But  anyhow,    I  did  vote  for  Roosevelt  and  found  out 
about  the   privacy   of  voting  booths.      I   did  have  to   get  rid  of    the 
kitten. 

I  was  just  21.      I   guess  then  I  must  have  been  somewhat  a 
little  bit  interested  in  politics.      I   certainly  was   passionate 
about   Roosevelt  or  I  wouldn't  have  dared  disobey   my   parents.      I 
was  very  obedient. 

Morris:        I'm  interested  that  things  were  being  broadcast  to  Asia  by   the 
OWI  as  early  as  1940. 

Sally  L:     That  started  in  1941.    after  Pearl  Harbor. 

Morris:        After   Pearl  Harbor? 

Sally  L:     Oh,  sure,     that's  when  it   started. 


19 


Observing  Germans   in  South  America 


Sally  L:     When  I  left   the  advertising  agency.    I  went  to  on  a  trip  to  South 
America  with  my   mother,   which  was  interesting.     That  was 
politicizing,    because  one  kept  meeting  real  live  Nazis  who  wore 
swastikas  on  their  sleeves.      It  was   in  Argentina.      Brazil   and 
Argentina  and   Chile;   Argentina  and   Chile   particularly. 

Morris:        In  uniforms   or  civilian  clothes? 

Sally  L:     Both.      Lot    of    civilians. 

Morris:        Really?     And  people  in  German  uniforms. 

Sally  L:      And   people   in  German  uniforms,    but   a  lot   of   civilians.      And  the 
civilians  wore  swastikas.      There  were  German  clubs.   There  was  a 
place  we  went  to  up  in  the  mountains  of  Chile  where  they  were  all 
German-speaking  people,    all  wearing  swastikas. 

Morris:        Did  you  speak  German? 

Sally  L:     No.      My   parents  did  a  little  bit,    when  they   didn't  want  us  to 
understand   them  at   the   dining  table.      I'm   afraid   I'm   being 
much   too  long  winded. 

Morris:        Last  time  when  we  talked  you  mentioned  Martha  Gerbode  and  Bill 
Roth  as   people  you  worked  closely  with  on   social   issues. 

Sally  L:     Oh,    that  was  much  later.      They  were  not  friends  yet  when  I  went  to 
the  OWI.      Well,    I  had  known  Bill  at  Santa  Barbara  Girls  School, 
because  he  went   to  Gate   School;   I   had  known  him  before  that — I 
don't    know    why. 

Anyway,    Bill  came  too  to  the  OWI,    but  he  soon  went  off 
to  Alaska,   and  finally  to  Assam.      He  worked  for  the  OWI  with 
the   army. 


Asian  Broadcasts  and   Study  Programs///^ 

Sally  L:      I   was  there   for   I  don't  know  how  many  years — 1940  to  1944,   or 
something.      1941   to   1944. 

Morris:        You  stayed  for  pretty   much  the  duration? 
Sally  L:      Oh,   yes. 

Morris:        One   of    the  articles  I   read  mentioned  that  you  became  concerned 
about  the  problems  Chinese  in  the  San  Francisco  OWI  had  finding 
housing. 

Sally  L:     Yes,    because   the  Chinese — 


20 


Morris:       Were  these  immigrants? 

Sally  L:     They   were  people  mostly  who  were  here  in  China  when  war  broke  out. 
They  were  mostly  wealthy  sons  and  daughters  of   Mandarins  who  were 
here  having  an  education  and   couldn't  get  back.      I   don't  remember 
anything  about  minorities  at  all  when  I  was    growing  up.      Nothing 
about   that,    so  it  was  a   shock  to  me  that  they  had  a  hard  time 
finding  a  place  to  live,    and  that  they  were  not  accepted  in  white 
neighborhoods. 

Morris:        Was  there  also  the  question  to  most  Caucasians — it  was  difficult 
to  tell   a   Chinese  from    a  Japanese. 

Sally  L:     Oh,   yes.      But   I   think  most   people  who  are  honest  with  you 

tell  you  that  often  it  is  hard  to  tell.      Actually   I   used  to  ask 
Phil   about   that  often.      He  worked  with  Chinese   and  Japanese   for 
many  years  on  a   daily   basis,   and  he   said  that  he   often  made 
mistakes  between  Chinese   and  Japanese.      He   could  tell  by   a  name. 
which  I  couldn't  have  when  I  was  at   the  OWI.     That  implies   that 
the  Chinese   couldn't  find  a   place   to  live  and  were  discriminated 
against  because  they  might  have   been  mistaken  for  Japanese — for 
the  enemy. 

Morris :        Perhaps. 

Sally  L:     Actually,    they   were  thought  ©f   as  lower  beings.      After  all,    they 

were  brought  here  as   almost   slave  laborers  to  build  the  railroads. 
I   think  they   were  discriminated  against,    period. 

Morris:       Enough  so  that   growing  up  here  you  really  weren't  aware   of  Asians 
at  all? 

Sally  L:     At  all.      As  I   say,    I  wasn't  aware  of   other  minorities  except  that, 
of  course,   in  our  household  my  father  would  use  all   the   time, 
"noblesse   oblige,"  and   I    think  that's  what  one  would've  been 
expected — in  other  words,   it  would  be  a  lesser  human  being, 
someone  with  dark  skin,    I   think,    or  Asian.      But  you  know   that 
can't   be   true,    because   my   father  had  a  lot   of   business   in  Asia. 
He   used  to  go   to  Japan  quite  often.      But   I  never  heard  of   him 
knowing  a  Japanese  in   this    country.      Interesting. 

Morris:       That  must  have  made  a  real   impact  on  his  business  during  World  War 
II. 

Sally  L:     That  must  have,    but   I   don't — 

Morris:       By  then  did  you  stay  in  contact  with  him — 7 

Sally  L:     Oh.    yes.      Oh,    sure.      But    I   don't   remember   anything  about   that. 

But  I  just  know  in  my   childhood  that  he  went  to  Japan  a  number  of 
times. 

Morris:        Okay,    back  to  the  OWL      Was  much   of   the  staff — ? 


21 


Sally  L:      Chinese  in  my   department? 
Morris:        Yes. 

Sally  L:      Some   of    it  was   Chinese,    yes.      And  I   became  very,   very    close   friends 
with  a  woman  who  was   Chinese. 

Morris:        One   of    these    students  who   couldn't   go  home? 

Sally  L:      Yes.      She   came  from   a  very   prominent,   wealthy  family   in   China,    and 
who  wrote — this  is  a   radio  play — the  kind   of   thing  that  was  written 
to   be  sent   by   short-wave  radios,   which  weren't  allowed.      She  wrote 
a,    what  you  might   call   a  soap  opera  about  an  American  woman,    young 
woman — the   point  of  it  being  to  show  how  patriotic  young  Americans 
were   about    this  war.      And  I  was  the  model,    and  so  she  wrote  about 
me,    because  my  fiancee,    Tom   Cohen,   was  on  a  battleship,   and   I  was 
working  for   the  war  effort.      In  China,    people  of   her   social   and 
economic  background  were  not  working  for  the  war  effort — you  know, 
the   privileged  Chinese  were  not —    [laughs]      Can  you  believe  it? 
[laughs] 

Morris:        This  was   the   period  when  the  U.S.    was   pouring  tons  of  money    and 
supplies  into  the   Chiang  Kai-Shek  regime — 

Sally  L:     That's  right,    absolutely.      Owen  Latti more  was  trying  to  tell 

people  about   this,   and  Owen,   you  see,   became  the  head  of   the  OW I 
here.     And  Owen  and  Phil   were  pals  in  spite  of   their  age 
differences,  because  they  had  worked  together  in  an  organization 
that   promoted  research   and  industry   between  the  United  States  and 
China — between  the  western  world  and  Asia,    The   Institute  of 
Pacific  Relations. 

Morris:        In  the  1940s? 

Sally  L:      In  the  1940s  and  the  1950s.      It  was   closed  after   the  war  by   the 
[congressional]   McCarran  Committee,   because   there  were   people  in 
it  who  were  considered  politically   left  wing.      Then  Phil   had  a 
terrible   time   getting  a  job. 

But   Phil   worked  there  for  years,    and  that's  where  he 
originally  knew  Jack  Service  and   all   those   people.      Of   course,    I 
didn't  know    them    then.     During  the  war  at   the  OW  I,    I  was  just 
working  for   Phil.      I   certainly  was  not  an  Asian  scholar.      I  knew 
nothing  about  Asia  until    that   time. 

Morris:        You  became  engaged  when  you  were  at   the  OWI? 

Sally  L:     Yes.      And  just  like   in  a   popular  magazine   story,    Phil   and  I 

announced  our  engagement  to  two   different   people  on  the    same   day. 
In  retrospect,    that   too  was  like   a   soap  opera. 

Morris:        Yes,   I  can  see  that. 


22 


Sally  L:      So,   at  any   rate,   as  you  well  know,    later  in  the  1950s,    Jack 

Service,  like   so  many   other  people,   was  dishonored  and  removed  from 
his  j  ob. 

Morris:        He  was   then  in  the  Foreign   Service? 

Sally  L:      That's   right.      In   China.      The   Institute   for  Asian   Studies    involved 
both  businessmen  and  scholars   and  was   supported,    I  guess,    by   grants 
from  foundations.      You  see,    this   is   all   in  a    period — I   didn't   even 
know    Phil.      The  whole  period  he  was  in  Asia  or  working  on  Asian 
issues.      I   didn't   know   him   at   all. 

Morris:        Because  he  was  out   of   the  country  a  lot? 

Sally  L:      No.      I  didn't  know  him  from   the   time  we  broke  up  until   the 

time  he  came  into  the  office  where  I  was  working  one  day  and 
took  over  as   the  head   of   it.      He   couldn't    get   into   the  war, 
because   his  eyesight  was   so  bad.      So  he  worked  on  the  docks. 
Everybody  wanted  to   get   into   that  war.      You're  too  young  to 
remember  that,   but — 

So,    Owen  pulled  him   off   the  docks  and  put  him  in  as  an 
.,    assistant.      He   came  in  as   the  head  of   the   Chinese   department, 
where  I  was  working.      But  you  asked  about   the  Chinese.      Of 
course,    that's  what  Owen  was   trying  to   say,    and   that's  what  Jack 
was   trying   to  say:    "You  can't   trust   the  folks   in  power.      Chou  En 
Lai   is   going  to  win   this   business,    and  he's   the   person  you   should 
be  looking  to." 

But   to  start  with,  I   didn't  know   anything  about  the  war  between 
China  and  Japan.      And  I  knew   nothing  at  all  about   China.      I  mean,    I 
knew   nothing  about  Asia  at  all.      I  was  just   there  at  the  OWI  at 
111   Sutter  Street.      It  just  happened   that   I   got  a  job  in   the 
Chinese    department. 

Morris:        Did  you  write  some  of — ? 

Sally  L:      I  was   supposed  to  be   the  assistant   to  a  drunken  Hollywood  writer 
who  would  come  in  with  a  hangover  every  morning  and  tell  me  what 
girls   he'd  been  with  the  night  before.      And  I  was  supposed  to 
write  his  sit-com  once  or  twice  a  week. 

One  wrote  about  what  a  Chinese  family  was  doing  here, 
anyway.  Can  you  imagine  people  sitting  in  the  hills  trying  to 
get  away  from  the  Japanese  listening  to  this  junk?  It  was 
written  as  it  would  come  out  of  Hollywood.  But  he  had  too 
much  of  a  hangover  to  write  these  things,  so  I  would  write 
them. 


23 


Owen  Lattimore  as   Head   of   OWI 


Sally  L:      Then  whoever  it  was,    and  I   don't   know  who  it  was   in   the 
government,    decided  it  was   not   being  run  as  a   propaganda 
agency    should   be  run,    although  I    don't    think   they  knew   what 
a   propaganda   agency    was.      At    that   time,    they   brought   in  Owen 
Lattimore,    and   they  kicked  out   the   guy  who  came  from  Hollywood 
who  was    running  the   show    here.      Now    I  don't  know   who  ran  it 
in   the  East — 

Morris:        What  did  Owen  Lattimore  do  with  it? 

Sally  L:      In  the  first    place,    he  made   the  important   programs  and   the   news 

programs    that  went    out.       I'm  ashamed   to   tell  you,    Gabrielle,    but    I 
don't   really   know   what   he    did   because   I   didn't    pay    that   much 
attention.       I   did  my   job,    and   I  worked  very    hard,    but    I   really 
don't    know     the    details. 

I    left   it  before   the  war  was  over,    briefly,    because  my    fiancee 
[Tom  Cohen]    came  back  after   two  years   and  we   got  married.      So    I  left 
OWI  because    I   thought   he'd   stay  assigned   to  his    ship   in   dry   dock  at 
Hunter's    Point.      But  he   didn't.      So   then   I  went    back   to  work  and    I 
worked   there   for   I   don't   remember  how    long,    until    he  came  back.      I 
worked  until    after    the  end  of    the  war — until   Tom    came   back. 


24 


IV      COUNCIL   ON    CIVIC  UNITY.    1940-1950;  WORLD   FEDERALISM 


Early    Civil    Rights  Efforts 


Morris:        When  did  you  start  your   interest  in  sculpture,    and  some  of   those — ? 

Sally  L:      After  the  war  I  was  interested  in  the   problems  of  what  we   then 
called   "race    relations,"  perhaps   sparked   by    this  business  about 
the   Chinese.      And  I   got  very  involved  in  something,    I   think   I 
mentioned   to  you,    the  Council    of   Civic  Unity. 

However,    I  found  out  through  a  very   embarrassing  circumstance 
that   I   could  not   give  a  public  speech.      I  had  been  doing  research 
that  nobody  else  had  done,   which  was  on  black  employment  in  the 
Bay   Area,    which  had  dramatically   increased  during  and  after  the 
war.      I  was   supposed  to   give  a  report  on  the  research  and   I 
couldn't   say   a  word;    flushing  and  stammering  and  eight  months 
pregnant,    I   couldn't   say   a  word.      So  I   decided   that     indeed   my 
mother  was  right,    and  I   had  to  go   back  and  be   creative. 

Morris:        Was  this  when  Dan  Koshland  was  head   of   the   council? 

Sally  L:      I'm  not   sure  that  he  was  at  that  point.      I   guess  he  was.      I   guess 
he  was.      Isn't  that  awful?      I   knew   Dan  well,    but   I   can't  remember 
him   sitting  up  there  as  being  the   chairman  of    the  board.      And,    of 
course.     I  was  not  on  the   board.      I  subsequently  went  on  the   board. 
I  worked  there  as  a  member  of   the  staff;   I  was  a  volunteer. 

Morris:       And  did   they  have  a   staff   director   then? 

Sally  L:     Oh,    yes.      A  man  by   the  name  of   Ed  How  den,  whom    I  became  very,  very 
close  to.      Those  were  very   political    times,    because  we  had,    after 
all,    dropped  a   nuclear  bomb  on  Hiroshima.      And  how    to  feel    about 
that? 

Morris:        [Very   close,   because  we]    were  on  the  West   Coast. 

Sally  L:     But  more  than  that,  it   saved  my   fiancee  from  having  to  land  in 
Japan.      It   ended  the  war.      So,    was  it  right  or  wrong?     At   that 
time,    of   course,   we   did  not  know  obviously  what  the  atom   bomb 


25 


Sally  L:      could  do.      Shortly   after   that,   when  finally   the  war  was  aver. 

Tom   shipped  home;   his  battleship  had  been  damaged  and  he  was  the 
engineer.      It  had  been  torpedoed.      So  we  were  married.      Then  how 
did  we  feel   about  this — the  terrible  fright  of  what  would  happen 
under  nuclear  bombs.      World  Federalism  was  just  getting  started.      We 
were  all  World  Federalists.     And  there  was  something  called  the 
American  Veterans  Committee,   which  was  made  up  of  veterans  wh© 
wanted  to  have  equality   in  the  armed  forces  and  ether  places. 
They  were  appalled  at  the  way  blacks  were  treated  during  the  war, 
and  I'm  not  sure  whether   they   wanted  to  get  rid  of  nuclear  weapons 
or  not,    but  nuclear  weapons   certainly  figured  in  this.      I   can't 
remember  what  their  other  deals  were,   but  they  were  a  very 
progressive  lot,   and  it  was  a  national   organization,  very   strong 
here  in  San  Francisco. 


Communist      Takeover  Attempt 


Morris:       Was   this  Amvets?      They're   still  around. 

Sally  L:  ^  I   don't   think  so.      No,    because   it  went  out   of  business  in  a   couple 
of  years,    taken  over  by   communists — Marxists — who  really   didn't 
want  this  progressive  movement  which  was  gathering  force  in  the 
United  States  to   grow   in  strength  and  power.     A  very   different 
day.      The  Marxists  wanted  to  be   the  leaders  in  the  progressive 
movement.      That's  why   they   tried  to  take   over,    and  I   could 
read  you  chapter  and  verse   en  that,   what  they   did  in  the  board  of 
the    Council    of    Civic  Unity,   for  instance. 

Morris:       Were  they   local  people? 

Sally  L:     Oh,    yes.      What  happened  in  ether   cities,    I  can't  tell  you,   but 
the   Council   of   Civic  Unity  fought  it  off  very   cleverly.      But 
they   didn't  in  the  American  Veterans  Committee,    and  it  soon  went 
out   of   business.      Now  what  it   did  nationally,    I    don't   know. 

But  Tom,   my  husband,   and  Ed  Howden  immediately  became  very 
close  buddies.      They  went  to  meetings   constantly — I   did  too,   when 
I   could,    although  by   that  time  I  had  a  baby,    and  also  women  were 
not  as  welcome.      [laughs]      Pretty   typical   of   the  times. 

Morris:       What  was  the  issue   around  which  this  takeover  of   the  Council  of 
Civic  Unity — ? 

Sally  L:     Well,    it  was  not  over  an  issue   particularly,    although   I   think  they 
wanted  to — and  I  really   can't  be  sure   of   this — they  wanted  to   do 
more  and  bigger  demonstrations  in  order  to  effect  change,   as  you 
might  imagine.      This  is  just  the   beginnings  of   the   civil   rights 
movement.      And  we  wanted  to  do  things  more  by  law,    I  think,    by 
trying  to   change  laws.      Civil   disobedience   seemed  very   radical 
indeed.      We  were  very   involved.      Tom   and  I — I'm  not  good  on  the 


26 


Sally  L:      dates  of   this — but  Governor  Earl  Warren  was  influenced  a  let  by 

the  Council   of   Civic  Unity;  in  the  second  term   he  put   in  an  equal- 
opportunity  law.      In  his  first  term,   as  a  matter   of  fact,    he 
wasn't  at  all   concerned  with   these   issues.       It's  interesting 
because  of  what  happened  to  him  after  he  was  appointed  to  the 
Supreme   Court. 


Tom   Cohen 


Morris:       Would  Mr.    Cohen  and  Mr.   Howden  have  gone  to  Sacramento  and  met 
with  him? 

Sally  L:     No,    but   Mr.    Cohen,    Tom,    was  in  the  law   firm  of  Jesse  Steinhart. 
who  was   one   of  Warren's  advisors. 

See,    all  these  people  we  mentioned  the  ether  day,   and  there 
are  lots  of  others,  were  involved  in  the   Council  for   Civic 
Unity.      I   should  have  said  Tom  was  a  political   person  too.      He 
came  from  a  wealthy,    prestigious,    conservative,    Park  Avenue  Jewish 
family,    who  I   think  probably   thought  he  was  not  living  up  to  the 
tradition,    to  marry   somebody  from   the  West.      In  fact,    there's  no 
question  about    that. 

Morris:       And  so  he  came  out  here  to  join  the  Steinhart  firm. 

Sally  L:      Yes,    although  on  the  way  to  a  California  law  firm,   he  was   disowned 
because  he  was  leaving  his  family  and  law   firm  in  the  East. 
According  to  his  father  and  others,    this   showed   that  he  had  become 
a   coward  during  the  war.      Otherwise  he'd  stay   in  the  East. 
He  was  told  that  one   couldn't   practice  law    that  far  from  Wall 
Street  and  Washington. 

Morris:       There  were  so  many   servicemen  who  had  been  through  San  Francisco 
who   came  back  to  settle  here   after  World  War   II. 

Sally  L:     That's   right.      I  was   dying  to  live  in  New   York,    oh,  heavens,    to  get 
away  from  my  mother!      Ohl      Oh,  heavens,    I   shouldn't   say   these 
things.       [laughter] 

Morris:       Oh  dear,  you  can't  win. 

Sally  L:     But   anyhow    that's   the   truth   right   there. 


Minorities  in  the  Bay  Area;   Fears   of   the  Atom  Bomb 


Morris:        It  sounds  like   the   Council   for   Civic  Unity  was  a  rather   thriving 
organization. 


27 


Sally  L:      Tremendously   so.    and  for  years. 
Morris:        Several   hundred  members  or — ? 

Sally  L:      Probably   several  hundred,      I   don't  even  know  who  knows   the 

history    about   it.      It  would  be   a  very   interesting  news  piece. 
Because,    as  far  as  I  know,   and  Gabrielle,    I  may  be  wrong,    but   I  have 
never  known  of   any   organization  in  the  country   that  worked  on 
these   problems  any  earlier   than  this  one.     And  it  was  fun.     We 
were  young  and  passionately  concerned.      I  mean  the  people  who  were 
involved  with  it  were  mostly  young.     Unlike  today  when  people  who 
work  for   things  are  mostly  old — the  same  people  by  the  way. 
[laughs] 

Morris:       Were  there  other  Councils  of   Civic  Unity   in  other  communities,    for 
instance,   in  the  Bay   Area? 

Sally  L:     I  don't  know. 

Morris:        Dan  Koshland,    in  his  oral   history,    mentioned  that  in  the  early 
seventies  it  was   barely  surviving.      They  no  longer  had  enough 
money    to  hire  an  executive  director. 

Sally  L:     No.   but   somebody   else  took  over  from  Ed  Hew  den,   his  name   I've 
forgotten.      He  was  there  for  a  long,    long  time. 

Morris:        During  the  war  you  said  you  hadn't  been  aware   of  Asians  living  in 
San  Francisco. 

Sally  L:      I  knew    there  was  a   Chinatown,    but   I  didn't  know   any  Asians. 

Morris:       Was  it  a  really  visible   change  in  the  number   of  black  families  and 
black  people? 

Sally  L:     Oh.    yes,    because  as  I  remember,    I  believe  it's  true  that  there 

were  only  four  thousand  black  families  before   the  war  living — it 
can't  have  been — in  the  Bay  Area,    but   I  think  it  was.      What 
changed  it  all  was   the   shipyards.      It  multiplied  just  immensely, 
[next   sentence   unclear]       [laughs] 

Morris:        They  too  were  having  trouble  finding  places  to  live — 7 
Sally  L:     Yes,    but   I   didn't  know    that  because   they   were — 
Morris:        They  weren't  involved  in 

Sally  L:     You're  right,    nor  in  my   protected  little  life,    until  the  war  was 
over,    and  then  this   became  a   passionate  interest   of   all   of   ours. 
Well,    and  then,    of   course.    Roosevelt  had  been  interested  in  these 
issues  to  a   degree,    a  little  bit   I  think.      Minorities,   yes.    I 
think  so. 


28 


Morris:        Mrs.   Roosevelt? 

Sally  L:     Mrs.    Roosevelt,    certainly.      Mr.    Roosevelt,    no.      Mrs.    Roosevelt 
certainly,    and  of   course   she  was  our   great  heroine. 

Morris:       And  the  young  men  that  you  knew   coming  from   the  service? 

Sally  L:     Yes.   were  terribly  upset  over  the  fact  that   the    blacks  were  not 
well  treated.      In  the  American  Veterans  Committee  there  were  some 
blacks,    but  as   I   said,    that  was  very   short-lived.      Boy.    it  was 
short-lived.       I'll  never  forget  that  because   these   people  were  so 
clever.      It's  not   so  obvious  today,    but  here  we  were,  innocent. 
Tom  was  four   or  five  years  older   than  I.   but   Charles   Garry,   a 
prominent  radical   attorney   even  today,   would   get   up  and  talk,   and 
he'd   talk  for   three  hours  and  close  everybody   out   so  that   those 
who  held  other  opinions  were  exhausted  and   de-energized. 

That's  a  very    simple   ploy.       [laughs] 

Morris:        Do  you  remember  anybody  else  who  was  active  in  the  American 
Veterans  Committee? 

Sally  L:     No.    not  except,    Ed.      Tom   and  Ed  are  the  only  people  I   can 
remember.     But  then  we  were  all  involved  with  the  World 
Federalists  too.      We'd   go   and  hear  Norman   Cousins. 

Morris:        He  would  come  out  to  San  Francisco  often? 

Sally  L:     He'd  come  to  San  Francisco.      Yes.    he  did,    and  then  a  man.    whose 
name  was   Cord  Meyer,   who  later  became  the  head  of  all   the   CIA 
operations   in  Europe.      That's  quite  a  jump  isn't  it? 

Morris:       Was  a  World  Federalist? 

Sally  L:     He  was  the  head  of   the  World  Federalists.      The  World  Federalists 
very   definitely  are   still   around.       It's   never   going  to  fold  up 
because  while  there  are  few    of   them   they  exist,    and  a  lot  of 
them  are  wealthy.      I  know   this  because   I   get  letters  from   people 
saying.    "We    can't   support   Ploughshares   because  you  don't   support 
the  World  Federalists,"  or   "I   am  World   Federalist,    and   I've 
always  been  a  World  Federalist,    and  that's  what  I  give  my 
money   to."     And   they    do  exist  financially,    very    definitely. 
Also,    we  have.    I  think  only  once  or  twice  gotten  proposals  from 
the  World   Federalists  for   something  or  other. 

Morris:        Was  peace  an  issue? 

Sally  L:     Oh.   yes.      I  don't  know    how    soon  we  became  absolutely   terrified  of 
an  atomic  bomb.      Maybe  you  can  remember  that  brief  and  dramatic 
part  of    recent  history  when  people  were  building  bomb  shelters? 

Morris:        There  was  a  resurgence  in  the  early  1960s — 


29 


Sally  L:      It  was  long  before  that  because  I  remember  so  well  1946;  I   can 

remember   two  or   three  or  four  years  later,  at  the  most,  talking  to 
Tom.      "We've   got  to   do   something,"  or  "What  are  we    going  te   do 
about    it.     I'm    so   scared."  and  his  saying,    "Forget  it."      [laughs] 
"Work  to   stop  the   cause   of  wars,   but  you   can't   do  anything 
to   protect  yourself   from    a  bomb  if   it's   going  to  be   dropped."     We 
then  built  the  house   that   I  live  in  today.      The  house   started   being 
built  about   thirty-seven  years  ago.      I  remember  there  was  talk 
about  building  a  bomb   shelter,   for  just  a  moment. 

#f 


Anti-Communism   Issues;    Loyalty  Oath 


Morris:       Was  the  anti-communist  tide     that  sort  of   swept  over  the  country     a 
part   of   the   Council   of   Civic  Unity's   concerns? 

Sally  L:     No,    that  was  quite  separate,    I  think.      Tom  was  caught  up  in  it 

from   the  point  of  view   of  being  anti-communist  himself.     We  were 
just  all   involved  with  civil   rights:  everybody   should  have  the 
right  to  believe  what  he   or   she  wanted,  and  to  have  a  voice  to 
express  it. 

Morris:       Were  there  any   charges  of   "You  must  be  pro-communist  if  you  are 

for  encouraging  all   these  people"  who  had  not   been  heard  from  much 
before? 

Sally  L:     Yes.      When  we  were  first  married,    Tom   and  I  were  very   close  to 

Dave  Jenkins,    who  was   the  head  of   the    [San  Francisco]   Labor  School. 
Louis  Weiss,    an  attorney   in  New   York,    was  a  big  friend  of   Dave's 
and  had  told  Tom  to  look  him  up. 

We  used  to  go  out  to  lunch  with  him,    and  Tom  one  day — 
unbelievable,    this  is,    I   think,    in  1945 — asked,    "Dave,    are  you 
really   a  communist?" 

And  Dave  said,  "Oh,no,   of  course  not."    And  we  made  a 
contribution  to  the  school.      In  those   days  we   didn't  have  much 
money   and,    anyhow,    people  weren't  that  charitable,    particularly 
in  support  of   causes.      I  remember  we   gave   $25   to  the  Labor  School. 
But  at  the  time  it  was  generally  assumed  that  Dave  was  a  member  of 
the   party. 

Anyway,    Tom  was  then  about  to  be  a  lieutenant  commander  or 
commander,    I  forget  which,    in  the  navy  reserve.      The  only  reason 
he  wanted  the  promotion  was  for  the  extra  dollars  he  would  have 
been  paid.      But  he   didn't   get  the   promotion  because  he    gave   the 
$25   to  the  Labor  School. 

Morris:       How   did  you  learn  that? 


30 


Sally  L:      I  guess  that  whatever  agency  looked  to   see  who  the   donors  to  the 
Labor  School   were  also  looked  into  the  records  of  those  reserve 
officers.      I  forget  how  we  found  out. 

Morris:        That  was  about   the  time  of  the  loyalty  oath  controversy  at  the 
University  of   California,   which  went  en  for  years  and  years  and 
years. 

Sally  L:     Oh.     that's   right.       That  was  a   sticky  kind  ef   thing. 
Morris:        Did   that  have  reverberations  over  here  in  San  Francisco? 

Sally  L:     Yes.    of   course  we  didn't   do  anything — it  was  what  we  talked  about 
all   the  time.     And  we  knew   the  attorney  who  wrote,    I   guess  the 
brief   for   those   members  of   the  faculty  who  wouldn't  sign  the 
loyalty   oath.      But  it  was   all   over  the  United  States.      It  happened 
that  Harold  Taylor,   who  was  the  president  of   Sarah  Lawrence  at  the 
time,   was  very  much  involved.      This  affected  all   the   universities; 
it  wasn't   only   the  University   of   Calif  or  ni  a,  after  all.      Although 
it  seemed  that  this  is  where  it  was  more  widely  known  than  any 
place  else.      At  Sarah  Lawrence,    there  were  people  and 
organizations — particularly  the  American  Legion — who  wanted  the 
college   to  fire  people  who  would  not   sign  a  loyalty   oath.     By 
definition,    those  who  wouldn't  were   considered  members  of   the 
Communist   party.      Harold  would  not  ask  the  faculty  to  sign  any 
oath  at  all.      It  was  a   cause   celebre.      But  Bronxville.    New   York, 
is   not  Berkeley. 

I  remember  Tom   and  myself  being  tremendously  involved 
emotionally  with  this  and  talking  about  it  all   the   time,    but  I 
think  we   could  have  had  no  effect  whatsoever.      It  happened  that 
Harold  Taylor  was  a  hero  because  he  had  stood  up  against  powerful 
forces  for   the  constitutional   rights  of   academics — as  we   saw   it. 

Morris:        You  must  have  had  a  baby   every   eighteen  months  or   so? 

Sally  L:     Oh.    more  than  that. 

Morris:        That  must  have  cut  down  your  time  and  energy   for — 

Sally  L:     Well,    I  was  at  home  with  the   children.     But   I  was  an  artist   back 
then.       I  wasn't  a   civic  person.      These  were  just  my   interests, 
[laughs] 

Morris:        I   see.       If  you're  now    an  artist,    why   don't  we  stop  there  for   the 
day. 


31 


V      CAREER    IN   THE   ARTS 
[Interview   2:     August  27,    1987] ## 

Studying  Sculpture 


Morris:       What  we're   to  talk  about   today   is  your  life  in  the  world  of   art. 
Had  you  already  had   all   those   children  when  you  began  studying 
sculpture? 

Sally  L:     No,    I  think  I   had  one  when  I  started  studying  sculpture,    and  then 
I  went  on  studying  sculpture  in  between   delivering  babies.      It  was 
a   wonderful   profession. 

Morris:       What  interested  you  about   sculpture?     Was  it  somebody  particular 
who  was — ? 

Sally  L:     No,    I   came  to  sculpture  because   I  didn't  want  to  write.      And  as  I 
said  last  week,    I  was  supposed  to.      I   couldn't   give  a  speech,    so   I 
couldn't   go   into  public  service.      So,    what  was  left?      I   had  to  be, 
as  my  mother  told  me,    "creative,"  so  I   knew    there  was  an  art  school 
in  San  Francisco.      Not  knowing  anything  about  art  at  all,    I 
went  to  the  San  Francisco  Art  Institute,    and  there  was  a  free 
place   in  a   sculpture  course  in  the  basement.      That  was  really  how 
it  happened.      I  went  into   the  sculpture   course,   and  I  knew   so 
little  that  at  our  first  assignment   I  said,    "Do  you  do  the  front 
as  well  as   the   back  or   the  back  as  well  as   the  front?" 

Morris:       But   it  obviously   took.      You  found — 

Sally  L:      It  took,   and  I  enjoyed  it  enormously.     And   I  must  have  worked 
at  it  for    [stops  to  think  how   long]  — 

Morris:        The  notes   I  have   say  you  were  actively  sculpting  for  fifteen  years. 

Sally  L:     I   think  it  was  probably   more  than  that  because  it  was  certainly 

1950  when  I   started.      It  was   probably  more   than  that.      Oh,    I'd   say 
twenty  years  off  and  on.      But   some  of   those  years  were  learning. 


32 


Morris:        Yes.      Did  you  study  just  with  people  in  San  Francisco? 

Sally  L:     Yes.    and  I   really  didn't  study  very   hard  because   of   all   those 
children.      I  took  some  sculpture   courses  and   I  really   used  the 
school   as  a   studio  more,   but   I  never  learned  the  basics,   which   is 
one   of   the  reasons   I   gave  it   up.      I  never  learned  anatomy,   hew 
to  draw,    how    to  master   different  materials.      I   didn't  even  study 
the  history   of  art  or  aesthetics  of  any   kind.      Today   one    doesn't 
have   to  learn  those   things,    but   I  think  that's  wrong.      [laughs] 

Everything  I  learned,    I'm   afraid   I  learned   by    doing,   really, 
and  so.    could  not.    after  giving  up  sculpture  many  years  later,  go 
back  to  it  and  pick  up  my  skills.      Those   I  had  were  based  on  hard 
work  and  determination,    not  on  acquired  knowledge. 

Morris:        Did  you  work  in  clay? 

Sally  L:      I   started  by   working  in  clay   and  learning  how   to  cast  things. 

That's   because   that's  what  they  were    doing  in   that    course.      And 
interestingly,    at  the  art  school   at  that  time  were  some  of   the 
artists  who  have  become,   without  any  question,    the  top  artists  in 
northern   California  today.      And  they   were  there  then. 

Morris:       Who  were  they? 

Sally  L:      In  my   sculpture  class  was  a  man  whose  name  is  Manuel  Neri. 
Bob  Hudson  was  in  one   of   my   classes.      I   don't   know   if   these 
names  mean  anything  to  you,    but   they're — I   really   can't   think. 
Oh.  yes,    a  man  who  is  no  longer  alive — a  man  named  Alvin  Light. 

Morris:       Did  your  parents  approve  of   sculpture? 
Sally  L:     Yes.      They    didn't   take  it    seriously. 
Morris:       Were  there  specific  kinds  of  things  that — ? 

Sally  L:      I  sold  some  of  what  I  made  and  had  a   gallery  exhibit,    but  it 

really   didn't  make  me  a  professional.      Or  did  it?      I   don't  know;   I 
still   don't  know.      [laughs]      It's   awfully  hard  to  tell  what's   a 
professional   and  what  is  not. 

Morris:        Making  something  that  pleases  somebody  else  obviously — 

Sally  L:      In  those   days,    they   had  all   over   the  United  States — in  a  very 
major  way  here — competitive  exhibitions  at  museums.     And 
the  Art  Association  Annual,    so-called,    was  a   nationally  known 
show.      I  would   get  in  it.      Sometimes   I  would   get   prizes,   you   see. 

Morris:       This  is  a  juried  show? 


33 


Sally  L:     Juried  shew,    yes.      And  anybody   could  enter.    I  guess,    if  you  were  not 
a   student.      By   that   time   perhaps   I  was  not,    although   I'd   go  to 
school    to  use   the  studio.      But   then  you  could  compete  against  the 
best  artists.     Everybody  would  send  their  stuff  into  the  Art 
Association  Annual,    and  as  I  say   I  often  got  in,    and  often  sold, 
and  so  forth.      So  that  made  me  feel  like   I  was  making  some 
progress. 

Morris  :        Kind   of   exciting. 

Sally  L:     Yes.      Whether  you're  a   professional   or  an  amateur,    it's  a  little 
hard  to  tell,    when  you  have  success.      [laughing] 

Morris:       But   if  you  were  pleased  with  what  you  were  doing  and  other  people 
were,   you  know,    selling  is  one  measure   of  acceptance. 

Sally  L:     Yes,    without   any   question. 

Morris:       Were  there  any   particular  teachers   that   broadened  your 
education? 

Sally  L:     No,     I   really  wouldn't  say   so,    no.      That  first   course   I  took  was 

sculpture  with  Robert  Howard, whose  father  built  the   Campanile.      He 
has   been  in  art  circles  in  northern  California  forever.      I   could 
name  you  who  the  teachers  were,    but  it  isn't  that  they  were 
particulary   inspiring.      I  guess  just  working  hard  and  enjoying 
myself  and  finding  I   could  do  it  was  exciting. 

Morris:       And  then  did  you  go  en  to  hammer  and  chisel? 

Sally  L:      Oh,    I  never  went  on  to  hammer  and  chisel,    but  I   did   go  on  to  learn 
how    to  weld.      I   did  very   little  welded  sculpture,    then  I  went  en 
to  making  things   directly  out  of   certain  kinds  of  materials,    but 
never    out   of    stone. 


California  School   of   Fine  Arts;  Helping  Minorities 


Morris:       How   did  you  happen  to  get  involved  in  the  art  policy? 

Sally  L:     After  a  few  years   I   got  involved.      At  the   time,    the  art  school 

was   called  the  California  School   of   Fine  Arts,    and  attached  to  it 
loosely  was  an  enormous   group  of  artists  who  were  members  of  what 
was   called  the  Art  Association.      It   didn't  take   any  quality 
control  to  be  a  member  of   the  Art  Association.      There  were 
certain  benefits,    and  I   forget  what.      My   first  involvement, 
really,   with  art  policy-making,    I  think,   was  being  elected,    for 
some  reason  or   other,    to  whatever  kind  of  board  of  directors  they 


34 


had.  Along  with  a  number  of  really  good  artists.  I  tried  to  make 
this  into  a  real  professional  organization.  That  meant  excluding 
a  number  ef  Sunday  painters.  90  percent  of  the  whole — 

[Interruption — phone   call] 

Sally  L:     So  I  became  very   involved  in  that.      I   think  we  now  we've  moved  up 
probably  to  the  1960s.      I   got  very  involved  in  the   education 
committee  and  tried  to  improve  the  quality   of   education  in  the 
school.      Then  I   got  tremendously  involved  in  trying  to  help 
minorities — let  me  say   minorities,    because  all  those  people 
who  couldn't  afford  to   go  to  this  school   proved  to  be  minorities — 
how    to  get  them   into  this   school,   which   is  very   expensive.      And  so 
I   developed  a  plan,   and  I'm   trying  to  think  who  was  involved  in  it 
besides  myself.      There  must  have  been  others  besides  Fred  Martin, 
who  was  Dean  of  Students,    I  believe.      I  involved  someone  from   the 
Art  Commission  in  this.      Yes,    that's  right.      The  Art  Commission  in 
the  meantime,    through  a  series  ef   circumstances,   had  become 
involved  with   the  neighborhood  arts,    and  it  wasn't  hard  to  put   the 
Neighborhood  Arts  people  together  with  the  administration  of   the 
^  Art  Institute — 

Morris:       Which  by  then  was  the  Art  Institute? 

Sally  L:      I   really   don't  know    the  date  it  changed.      It  was  just  a  name  change, 
not  a —   but  then  students   could  get   credit — have  their  tuition 
paid — by   working  in  neighborhood  art  centers.     And  it  became  a 
very  big  project  actually,    so  that  they  worked  all  over  town  in 
the  art  centers  that  the  Art  Commission  was  really  paying  for — the 
Art   Commission  and  then  ether  foundations.      I   didn't   know  Ed 
Nathan  at  the  time   (I   don't  know    if  Ed  was  there  at  the  time),    but 
the  Zellerbach   Foundation   got  very   involved  in   that. 


San  Francisco  Art  Commission;  Harold  Zellerbach 


Sally  L:     Well,    Harold  Zellerbach  was  the  head  of   the  Art  Commission,    and 

that's  a  whole  ether  story,    which  I  have  to  get  into.*     That   sort 
of  was  my   program   in  doing  that. 

Morris:       Was  this  commission  related  to  some  of   the  work  you  were  doing  also 
with  the  Council  ef  Civic  Unity? 


*See  Regional   Oral   History   Office   interview  with  Harold  Zellerbach 


35 


Sally  L:     No.    no.      The   Council   of   Civic  Unity  was  long  in  the   past. 
Morris:        Were  you  coming  in  contact  with  young  black  kids  and  Asian  kids? 

Sally  L:     No.    not  really.      It  was   philosophical,    political.      But   net 

altogether,    I  mean  I  certainly  did  come  into  contact  with  some 
after  I   got   this   started.      I   don't   know  whether  it   goes  to   this 
day,    but   that's  a  long,    long  time  ago,    but 

Morris:        There  are   still  neighborhood  art  centers. 

Sally  L:     Oh,    I  know    there  are,    and  actually  a  while  ago  I  went  to,    of   all 
things,    a  benefit  for   the   best   of   them,   at  Hospitality  House   down 
on  Ellis  Street.      A  man,    to  my   surprise,    got  up  and  introduced  me, 
saying,    "There  is   the   person  who  started   all    of    this."     And   this 
is   twenty- five  years  later. 

Morris:        Wasn't   that   nice? 

Sally  L:     Actually   I   got  an  honorary   degree  from   the  Art  Institute  a  couple 
of  years  ago  for   this   program   that  I  put  in.      Otherwise   they've 
only   given  that  degree  to  artists,    and  I  was  not  known  as  an 
artist  at   that   time.     Also   I  was  very  much  involved,   actually,   from 
the  outside   and  then  from   the  inside   in  trying  to  get  a 
neighborhood  arts  program  going  in  the  Art   Commission.      Later   I 
was  put   on  the  Art  Commission,   but   this  is  all  before. 

Morris:        The  Art   Commission  wasn't  doing  anything  about — ? 

Sally  L:     Not  until   a  conference  was   called  together  in  the  early  1960s 
sometime.      It's  awfully  vague  in  my  memory.      Mr.   Zellerbach 
got  really   turned  on  by   some  of   the  people  who  were  involved  in 
neighborhood  arts  and  brought  a   strong,    important   program   to  the 
Art  Commision,    and  it   still   exists. 

Sally  L:     Ed  Nathan  fits  right  into  this,    although  I   did  not  know  Ed  at  that 
time  at  all.     He  is  a  model   for   the  whole   country   and  what  he's 
done  in  it.      But  it  all   started,    of   course,    because  you  saw  Harold 
Zellerbach  absolutely   fall   in  love  with  this  very   gutsy   lady, 
Becky  Jenkins,    the   daughter,    by   the  way,    of  Dave  Jenkins.      His 
eyes  were  just  opened  at  this  meeting. 

It's  very   interesting.      Harold  Zellerbach  wanted  to  expedite  a 
certain  plan  for   rebuilding  the  Civic  Center  in  San  Francisco. 
He  wanted  a   symphony  building,   and   I  forget  what  else.     You  know, 
they   would  have  been  the  Zellerbach  buildings.      He  would  have  put 
a  lot  of  money   into  it.     He  was,    I   don't   know   for  how   many  years, 
the  head  of   the  Art  Commission,      There  was  a  bond  issue  which  was 
voted   down,    and  quite    correctly.     Quite    correctly. 

Morris:        Really?      It  was  too  much  money? 


36 


Sally  L:     No.      It  was   so  badly   conceived.      It  was  just  terribly  badly 

conceived.      At  this  time,    and  I'm  not  sure  which  went  first — 
this  is  what  I  can't  remember — whether  this  meeting  he 
called  went   before  the  vote  or  whether  it  went  after  the 
vote.      In  the  meantime,    I  was  asked  to  be  on  the  Art 
Commission. 

When  I  walked  in  to  the  commission  on  that  first  day,    he  said 
to  me,    "  Of   course,   you  will   back  the   bond  issue  for  the   Civic 
Center."     And  I   said,    "No,    Mr.    Zellerbach    I  will   not.      It   is   badly 
conceived."     And  he   said,    (and  it  was   the  first   time  by    the  way. 
although   I've  been   called  it  since)   — I  was   called  a  "traitor 
to  my  class." 


Neighborhood  Arts  Program 


Sally  L:     Anyway,    I'm  not  sure  whether  it  was  before  or  after   this,   but  really 
Mr.  Zellerbach  and   that  meeting  he   called  started  the  neighborhood 
arts  program   in  San  Francisco.      He  called  some  very   high  level   things 
eastern  consultants  here  to  San  Francisco — in  those   days  those  were 
not   done — to  analyze  the  needs  of   the  arts  in  San  Francisco.      And 
it  was  very  obvious — well,    in  fact,   we  got  to  know    the   people  very 
well  who  ran  it — that  they  were  to  come  out  with  the  answer  that 
they  needed  all    these  buildings — the   civic  center,    the   symphony  hall 
and  whatever   they   needed  done   to  the  opera  house,    and  so  forth. 
So  Harold  called  all    these  representatives  from   the  arts   together. 

The  meetings  went  on  for  weeks.      The  meetings  included  people 
like  Elise  Haas,   and  somebody  from  the  opera  and  the   symphony  and 
all   the  museums.      There  were  those  of  us  who  were  asked  (who  they 
thought  were  not   going  to  be  traitors  to  our   class)  who  insisted 
that  there  be   some  artists  there,    you  see.       [laughs] 

Morris:        Of   course. 

Sally  L:     Of   course.      You  say.    of   course,    but  in  those   days  that  was  not — 

Morris:        Well,    the  Art  Commission  says  it  will  include  some  artists,   and 
some  poets,    and — 

Sally  L:     That's   right,    but   they    weren't  very   powerful   artists  and  poets, 
I'll   tell  you.    at  that   time.      So  anyway,    he  was   doing  this 
separately.      It  wasn't  an  Art  Commission  thing,    although  he  was 
head  of   the  Art   Commission.      He  was   doing  it   privately. 

And  we  asked  him.    "Do  you  think  there'll  be   some  minorties 
there?"  Of    course.      You  wouldn't   think   that  was   surprising.     But 
anyway,   out  of   this  came  a  woman  who  was  working  at  the  Art 


37 


Sally  L; 

Morris : 

Sally  L; 
Morris : 
Sally  L; 
Morris : 
Sally  L: 

Morris : 
Sally  L : 


Morris : 


Sally  L; 


Commission  who  was  simply  brilliant  on  the  needs  for  neighborhood 
arts.      And  this  is  what   turned  Harold  into  his  passionate  interest 
in  neighborhood  arts.      The  history   of  it  is  really  quite   amusing. 
I'm   sure   that  Ed  Nathan  will  know   all   this. 

In  other  words,    the  neighborhood  arts   commission  became  appealing 
to  him   so  that  it — 

Oh,     I   don't  think  there  was  a  neighborhood  arts   commission  then. 

Or    program. 

The  program  was  new.      It  had  not  yet  been  thought  of. 

Where  does  Ruth  Asawa   come  in  on  this? 


She  is  really   a  rather   separate  thing, 
schools,    you   see. 

Right.      And   that's    different? 


She  worked  through   the 


Very   different.      It  was  really   different.      I  am  extremely  bad  in 
telling  you  this  about  which  years,    one   goes  after  the  other,    and 
it  all   sort   of  froze  into  a  mass  for  me.     By  now,    in  saying  that, 
I'm   up  to   the  late  1960s.       I'm  sure  that  business  that  I   did  for 
the  Art   Institute  was  in  the  late  1960s,  too.      So,    I   don't  know  what 
happened  between  1953   and  1960.      [laughs] 

Let  me  see  if  I  can  nail    this   down.      Mr.   Z ell er bach  wanted  what 
finally  became  the  Davies  Symphony  Hall  to  be  the — [speakers 
overlap,    unclear] — he  would  have  liked  it  be   a  Zellerbach  Symphony 
Hall? 

No,    it  wasn't  exactly  that  hall.      It  was  a  different  architectural 
plan.      And  it  was   a  very   bad  architectural   plan,    not   useful,    so  I 
was   told — I'm   not,    obviously,    an  architect — by   people   I  respect. 
And  the  bond  issue  failed.      It  was  to  be  put  up  with  the   proceeds 
of   a  bond  issue.     And  then  he  would  have  put  a  lot  of   money   into 
it,    sure,   and  then  it  would  have  been  like   Mrs.    Davies — it  would 
have   been  Zellerbach. 


Morris:        Was  that  before  or  after  he  decided  there  would  be  a  Zellerbach 
Hall  at  the  Unversity   of   California? 

Sally  L:     See,    this  is  a   different  Zellerbach   and  that's   the  point. 
Morris:       Okay,    that  is  so  hard  to  remember. 

Sally  L:     Because  Jim  Zellerbach,    his  brother,    was  the  ambassador 
to  Italy.     And  maybe  Harold  Zellerbach  put  money  into 
Zellerbach  philanthropies.      But  he  was  in  competition 


38 


Sally  L  :     with   this  very  wonderful   citizen,   his   brother.     Not  that 
Harold  wasn't,    but  he  was  also  a  wonderful   citizen,    but 
I  think  not  quite — 

Morris:        It   sounds  as  if   he  had  a  fairly  strong  idea  of  how   he  wanted  the 
Art   Commission  to  run. 


Revamping  the  Art  School;  Art  Auctions 


Sally  L:      [chuckles]      I'll  go  back  to  the  art  school,    because   there  were  a 
lot  of  other   things   that  were  happening  at  the  art  school.      It 
was  a  very    interesting  time  in  education  generally,    of   course, 
but  art  education  also.     You  asked  how    I  was  involved  in 
political   things  while  I  was  in  arts.      One  of   the  things  was 
that   I   thought  as   Fred  Martin  did   (He's   the   dean  today,    academic 
dean.       I   guess  by   this  time,    of   course.    1  had  been  for   a  long  time 
on  the   board  at  the   art   school.)   that   there    should   be   teachers 
and  students  represented  en  the  board.      Now,    of   course, 
minorities. 

Morris:       Good  for  you.      Where  had  you  gotten  that  idea? 

Sally  L:      [laughter]      I  have  no  idea.      And  then  I  remember  Fred  and  I  went 
to  a  meeting  in  Chicago  of  educators   in  which  there  were  a  lot  of 
students.      Of   course,   what  happened  is   that  it   boomeranged.      Oh.    I 
think  so,    because   over  the  years,    there's  just  an  enormous 
percentage  of  students  who  really  have  ideas   that  are  not 
necessarily  in  the  interests  of   the  school. 

Morris:        A  student  member  of   the   trustees? 

Sally  L:     Yes.      Or  they   want   someone — decisions  on  personnel  become  a 
popularity   contest.     A  person  who  makes   us  work  the  least 
perhaps.       [laughs]      So.     I   think  that's  been  a  very   great 
problem  for  the  trustees.     Anyway   I  worked  hard  for   the 
school    in  a  financial,  way   too.      I  went  on  the  board  when 
the  school  was  in  terrible  financial   straits.      It  almost 
had   to  close   down.      In  fact.    Harold  Zellerbach,    same  Harold 
Zellerbach  (and  this  was  long  before   I  went  on  the  Art 
Commission)   was   chairman  of   the  board,    and  he  really  saved 
the   school.      He'd    go  around  and   pound  on   people's    desks  and 
say   they   had  to  give  five  thousand  dollars,   which  in 
those  days  was   a  lot.      And  I   gave  an  art  auction,    the  first   of 
what   became  a  series  of   art  auctions.      That  also  helped. 

Morris:        Was  that  a  new  idea   then? 


39 


Sally  L:      It  was  sort  ef  a  new  idea,    although  I   don't  think  it  was  the  first 
time,    or  even  maybe   the  second  time,    but  it  was  the  first  local 
art  auction  ef  any   size.      They   used  to  have  political  ones,    but 
this  was  the  first  one   of   any   size.      It  was  dene  at  the  Legion 
of  Honor,    I   think;   I  mean,   it  was   big  stuff. 

Morris:        When  you  say   art  auction,    was  this  members  of  the  Art  Association 
who  would  donate  their  work? 

Sally  L:     Yes,    but  you'd  be  very   careful   about  which   ones  you  picked  and  so 
forth  and  so  on. 

Morris:        Right.      What  exactly — 

Sally  L:     The  ones  that  weren't  selected  went  back  to   the   artist. 

Morris:        Would  that  be  a  matter  of   distress? 

Sally  L:     Yes.       I've  really   quite  forgotten.      Yes,    I  think  it  would  have 
been.      A  matter  of  more  distress,   as  I  saw   it,   was  how    those 
who  ran  the  event  would  choose   and  refuse  art  that  was  offered  te 
the  auction.      In  later  years,    I   did   two  very   large   art  auctions, 
both  for  political   candidates.      These  were  very  big  ones. 

Morris:       How  much  money  were  you  hoping  to — ? 

Sally  L:     Oh,    twenty   thousand  dollars  or   something  in  those   days.      On  one  we 
made   sixteen,    I  think,   and  that  was  enormous.      But   then  later,    we 
did  one  for    [Presidential    candidate  George]   McGovern    [1972],     We 
did  one  for  Bill  Roth  when  he  ran  for   governor    [197 A].      Of    course, 
those   raised  twenty   and  twenty-five  thousand  dollars,    maybe  more. 
There  were  those  of  us  who  would  buy  something  in  one  auction  and 
then  sell   it  back  at  the  next  auction.      The  University  Art  Museum 
is  filled  with  art  that  Phil,    my  husband,   who  always  had  a  lot  to 
drink  at  these  events,    would  buy   and   give  to  the  University  Art 
Museum,   with  which  he  was  deeply  involved. 

Morris:        That  is  an  interesting  kind  of   combination  of  sociability 
and   good  works  and  politics. 


More  on  the  Art  Commission 


Sally  L:     There  were  a  lot  of   other   things   to  do  with   the  Art  Institute. 
But — speaking  of  political  involvement — the  next  thing  that 
happened  was  that  when  there  was  a  new   mayor,    I  was  net 
reappointed  to  the  Art  Commission.      You  always  resign  as  a 
commissioner  and  then,    in  those   days,   you  were  simply   reappointed. 


40 


Sally  L:     Well,    it  was  pretty   clear   that  Harold  Zellerbach  had  talked  to  Jee 
Alioto,     the  new    mayor.      It  wasn't  just  the  bond  issue.      The 
executive   director  of  the  Art   Commission  had  finally  retired  after 
many  years.      Harold  had  someone  he  thought  should  be   appointed, 
but  there  were  lots  of   us  who  thought  that  there   should  be  a 
national    search,    because   the  Art  Commission  had  to  do  important 
things  in  those   days;  much  less  so  today. 

So,    with  Alfred  Frankenstein  of  sainted  memory,*  I  said  we 
thought  a  director   should  not  be  appointed  until    there  was  a 
national   search. 

H 

Sally  L:     We  lost,    by   the  way.      It  was  not  the  first  time. 

But   by   then,    Mr.   Frankenstein  and   I  were  very  much  involved — 
and  we  would  meet  with  other  people — in  trying  to  see  to  it  that 
two  per   cent   of   the  money   spent  en  public  buildings   go  to  art. 
And  it   did  and  it  does.      We  did  get  that  through  and  felt  very 
good  about  it. 

Morris:       How   did  the  art  in  public  buildings   program  come  about? 

Sally  L:      First  of  all  we  had  to  get  the  Art   Commission  to  agree,    and  they 

did.      Then  it  had  te  be   organized  so  that  the  board  of   supervisors 
would  pass  it — get  spokesmen  to  present  the   problem — and  it 
passed.     Actually,   by   the  time  I  was  there,    it  was  not  very   much 
of  a  struggle. 

Morris:       Was  there  a  struggle   over  what  art  would  go  in  what  building? 

Sally  L:     No,    that  was   the  Art   Commission's  purview.      The   struggle  was  to 
insist  that  contractors   spend  that  much  money. 

Morris:       How   did  you  and  Mr.     Zellerbach   get  along  as   people? 

Sally  L:     We   didn't  go  in  the  same   circles.      It  wasn't  that  we  disliked  each 
other;   we  just   disagreed.      I   don't  think  he  was   used  to   people 
doing  that. 

Morris:        Did  you  feel    that  the  results  were  worth  the  effort  that  went  into 
being  a  member  of   the  Art   Commission? 


*Frankenstein  was  for  many  years  the  nationally  respected  art 
critic  of   the   San  Francisco  Chronicle. 


41 


Sally  L:      It  wasn't  an  extremely  exciting  commission  because  there  was  net 
very   much   discussion.      It  was  somewhat  interesting  being  on  a 
commission. 


42 


VI      DEVELOPING   SKILLS    IN   ORGANIZATION   AND    INNOVATION 


Art  Institute  Symposium 


Sally  L:     From   1960  to  probably  1968.    I  was  very   much  involved  in  the  Art 
Institute.      The  biggest  job  I  ever   did  was  to  organize  and   chair 
a   national   symposium   here,    and  I  have  to  say  that  was  a  smash 
success.     Top  artists  in  those  years   came  to  it — artists  who  never 
came  to  San  Francisco  before — people  like   Frank  Stella  and 
CLaes   Oldenburg  and  on  and  on.      It  was  wonderful.      It  was  just  a 
terrific  symposium. 

Morris:       Any  specific  subject?      Or  was   this  a — ? 

Sally  L:      tuess  what  modern  is   doing  today"  probably.      It  was  at  a  high 

point  in  modern  art  history  when  American  artists  were   the  leading 
artists  in  a  very   art-conscious  world.     And  these  were  the  very 
painters  and  sculptors — or  some  of   them — that   came  to  the  San 
Francisco  Art   Institute's  Symposium. 

Morris:        Did  you  have  to  lobby  to   get  San  Francisco   selected? 

Sally  L:     No.   wejust  put  it  on.     But  I  guess  it  was  my  idea,  and  I  got  the 
Art  Institute  involved  with  it.      It  was  an  Art   Institute    project. 
One   thing  that  happened  was  that  the  coordinator — there  was  only 
one   person  on  the   staff  for   this   (Gee,    when  I   think  of   things  that 
we   used  to   do!)   and  a  month  before  the  thing  went  on,    she  ran  away 
with  a  man  who  was  not  her  husband  and  disappeared.      [laughs]      A 
major   crisis  it   seemed  at  the  time! 

Mortis:       Leaving  you  with  all   the — ? 

Sally  L:     Well,     I   couldn't   possibly.      I   didn't  have   the   necessary    skills  or 
the   time,    considering  the  other  responsibilities  of   the   symposium. 
But   Fred  Martin's  wonderfully   competent  wife  jumped  in  and  took  over. 
It  was  a  disaster.      You  can  imagine   the   paperwork  involved  in  a   thing 
like    that.      And   the   fund  raising.      It's  just   amazing  we   couldn't 
get  it   directly  funded.      I  ran  around  and   got   people  to    guarantee 


A3 


Sally  L:     ticket  sales.      I  think  some  people  would  tell  you.    if  their  memories 
are  long  enough,    that  it  was   the  biggest  art   thing  that's   ever 
happened  ever  happened  in  San  Francisco,    from   the  point  ©f  view   ef 
the   people  who   came. 

Morris:        I  can  believe  it. 

Sally  L:     And  it  was  at  the  Fairmont  Hotel.      It  was  jammed — it  was  just 
absolutely  jammed. 

Morris:       How    fun  that  must  have  been. 

Sally  L:      It  was  wonderful.     We  had  small  workshops  with  the  top  American 
artists  meeting  informally  with  students  and  art  lovers  here 
outside   the  school!      Then  the  big  speeches  with  delicious  and 
outrageous   statements.      It  was  very   exciting. 

Morris:        Did  you  have  to  also  run  around  and  find  places  for  all   these 
artists  to  stay? 

Sally  L:      I   don't  remember  that,    but   I  think  so.      I  think  they   ended  up 
staying  in  expensive  hotels,    don't  you  imagine?      Yes. 

Morris:       Well,    not  if  you  didn't  have  the  money   to — 

Sally  L:     Well,  we  had  to.      We  had  to  find  it   somehow,    although  on  the  other 
hand.     I   don't   think  artists  took  honoraria. 

Morris:        Did  Ben  Swig  provide  some  space  for — ? 

Sally  L:      I  think  he  did.     I  don't  know  that  he  did  at  the  hotel.     Now   that 
I   don't   know.       I  really    don't.      Actually    I'd  have   to  look   up — so 
many  years  ago — 1      really  would  have  to  go   through   the  files  of 
the  artists,    which  I   don't  even  keep  for   myself. 

Morris:       Did  the  symposium   have  an  effect  on  art  sales  in  general,    in 
galleries  in  San  Francisco?      Was  that  a  spin-off? 

Sally  L:      I   don't  think  so,    and  I'm   trying  to  remember  who  was  head  of   the 
museum.      I    don't  remember. 

Morris:       Well,    I  think  this  was  earlier,    but  there  was  a  reference  to  Grace 
Morley  as   being  a   great  influence  on  your  work. 

Sally  L:     That  was  the  silliest — you  must  have  gotten  that  out  of  that 
article.* 


*Albert  Haas,    Jr.,    "World  Class,"  San  Francisco  Magazine.    July 
1987,    pp.   94-95. 


44 

Morris:        Yes. 

Sally  L:     That  article   is   so   strange.      It's  wrong. 

Morris:       Hew  long  did  it  take  to  organize   something  like   this   symposium? 

Sally  L:      It   took  a  long  time.      I  would  say   it  took  probably  a  year  to  do. 
But  that  was  really  exciting  because  it  was  first-class.      We 
hadn't  really   had  first-class,    big-time  artists  here,    outside   of 
those  who  lived  here. 

Collecting  Art;   Raising  Children 


Sally  L:     By   the  way.    I  also,    in  the  meantime,    in  the  1960s  began 
collecting  art. 

Morris:       Local   artists  or  people  who  came — ? 

Sally  L:     No,    I  had  bought  a  little  art  before,    and  then  I  bought  quite  a 

lot,    although   today   I  don't  have  mere  than  what's  on  the  walls  of 
my  house.     One  reason  is  that  a  house  in  Sonoma   that  we  had  was 
thoroughly   burned  down,    and  the  art  with  it,    of   course.      The  other 
reason  my   collection  shrunk  is   because   I've   sold  a  lot   to  support 
organizations  in  deep  need — Sarah  Lawrence  and  Ploughshares  among 
them. 

Morris:       Well,    that  must  have     been  quite  something  to  part  with  what  you 
collected   over    the  years. 

Sally  L:     Well,   you  knew.      I  have  quite  a  lot  of  art.      It's  not  a  lot,   but 
when   I   say   "collected  art,"  yes,    I   guess   people  would  say   I  have 
collected  art.      I  have   some  very   so-called  important  art,   which 
was  net  important  art  when  I  bought  it. 

Morris:        That  must   be  very   satisfying. 

Sally  L:      Oh.  it  is.      In  fact.  yes.      I  mean.  Tom  and  I,   oh  God.    in  the 

1950s,    bought  a  piece   in  France  for   $500   that  turned  out   to  be   a 
major   painting  worth  a   $100,000  today,  or   something.     Years  ago  I 
gave  it   to  the  museum   because   it  is  a  Cubist  painting,    and  there 
is  so  little  art  from   that   critical   period  in  our  Museum   of   Modern 
Art.      Anyhow,    we  just   sort  of   didn't  think  of    collecting  art  at 
•11. 

Morris:        Were  you  picking  things   because   they  would  look  well   in  the  dining 
room,    or  because  you  thought   this  was — ? 


45 


Sally  L:      I  think  when  we  started,   Tom  was  not  particularly  interested  when  I 
first  bought   paintings.      I   don't   know  what   detail  you  want  me  to 
go   into.      I   don't   think  that's   really   of    interest.      Do  you? 

Morris:        Yes. 

Sally  L:     What  I  bought? 

Morris:       Why  you   bought  it. 

Sally  L:     Okay.      When  we  first  bought  things,    they   were  to  hang  in  the  house, 
but  net  match  anything  or  to  be  any   certain  place,    but  they  were 
certainly  to  hang  or   to  stand  somewhere.      At  the  end  of  the  time 
that   I  would   say  was   the   period  of   collecting,    they   didn't  have 
to  hang  in  the  house  at  all. 

Morris:        You  were   collecting  them  because  of  the  quality   ©f   the  work? 

Sally  L:      I  always   collected  them   because   of   the  quality.     But   for  years 
I   didn't  buy  to  hang — do  you  see  what   I'm   saying?      I  had  an  art 
closet  in  which  more  than  half  of  what  I  owned  was  kept,    and  I'd 
change    things   around,    or   they'd   be   on  loan  a  lot. 

Morris:        To  muse  urns? 

Sally  L:     To  museums,  yes.     But  today,   I've  sold  a  lot. 

Morris:        Most  of  what  was  in  the   closet? 

Sally  L:      [Laughs]      Well,    there  are  things   that  changed  in  the  closet,    or  I 
gave  a  lot  of  it  to  museums. 

Morris:        You  were   collecting,   buying  mostly  younger  artists,    or  lesser 
known? 

Sally  L:     No,    no.      In  the  1960s — I   guess  it  was  at  the  beginning  of   their 
careers.      They  weren't  young  necessarily.      The   prices  were  very, 
very    different. 

Morris:       Were  they   people  that  you  knew? 

Sally  L:     Not  usually.      When  I  began  to  sculpt.    I  also  began  to  look  at  art 
seriously,    and   I  really  became  interested.      I  had  never  looked  at 
it  before.      Oh,    I   didn't  know    the  artists  personally,    no.      I  knew 
who  they  were.      Certainly   I  have  bought,   and  I   continue  to  sometimes, 
artists  like   that  one  whom  nobody  ever  heard  of   in  their  lives, 
like  that  one    [nods  at   painting  of   seascape  on  the   office  wall]   which 
are  very   atypical    actually   of    the  kind  of   art  I  like.      But   it's — 

Morris:       Appropriate  for    the    setting. 


46 


Sally  L:      That's   right.      And  I   certainly  have   bought  artists   that  are  young 
emerging  artists.      But   the  artists  that  I  really  began  to  buy   in  a 
different  way  are  artists,  yes.   are  very  well-known  artists.      Most 
of   them   have  become  much  better  since,    but  they  were  well-known. 

Morris:        Right.      Well,    that's   the   thing  to   do  is  buy   them   before   they   get 
well-known.      And  to  what  extent  was  it  an  investment? 

Sally  L:     None.      Absolutely    none. 

Morris:        Would  you  go   to  the  people  at  the  Art  Institute  and  ask  their 

advice*    or  in  working  with  them,   learn  who  was   doing  what  in  the 
field? 

Sally  L :     No. 

Morris:        I  would  imagine  it  takes  a  tremendous  amount  of   thought  and 

reading  and  moving  around  on  your  part  just  to  know  who  painters 
were. 

Sally  L:  _  Well,    if  you're  in  the  art  world  and  aware  of  what  is   going  on.    it 
seems  like  second  nature.      I   used  to   go  to  museums  and  travel  and 
go   to   galleries.       I   didn't   take   it  as   seriously  as  I  should  have, 
perhaps.      I   knew    there  are   people  who  spend  their  life   collecting 
art.       I   did  net   take   it  very   seriously   at  all. 

Morris:       But  you  enjoyed  it? 

Sally  L:     Oh,    I  loved  it.      And  I   had  enough  money   to  take   chances  and  to  buy 
a  bit.      My   children  were  more   or  less   grown  up  by   then.      I 
remember   the  one   that  was   still  at  home,    before  she  left  to  go  te 
boarding  school   or   college,    felt  odd  in  front  ef  her  friends  to 
see   those   awful   things  hanging  on  my  wall.      [laughs] 

It's  one   of   those   things  you  have  like — if  you  have   a    good 
ear  like    one   of   my    friend's — one  of   those   things — I  just  have  luck 
or   I    guess  what's    called  an  eye.      Things  turn  our.      It  happened. 

Morris:        And  your  kids,    you  didn't  take   them   along  to  galleries — 7 

Sally  L:     No,    I  could  never   get  them  to   go.    although  every  Saturday  morning 
it  was   suggested  and  hooted  down.     And  art  was  not  my   husband's 
great   interest.      Phil  liked  art.    but   I  took  him   too   seriously  when 
I   got  married.      When  he  said  there  were  two  paintings  he  didn't 
like  and   I  sold   them,    that  was   stupid  of  me.      The   things  one   does 
in  the  first  blushes  of   married  life!      I  think  he  became  more 
interested  in  contemporary  painting  over   the  years.      He  was   always 
intrigued  by  European  painting  of    the  fourteenth,    fifteenth, 
sixteenth   centuries.      And   I  have  to   say   my  very  favorite   painting 
is  one   that  he   picked  out.      It's  called  Men  with  Bottle."  painted 
by    Phillip  Guston.       It's  outrageous  and  wonderful. 


47 


Morris:        So  eventually  you  came  to  a   similarity   ef   tastes? 

Sally  L:      I   think  we  did.      He  just  wasn't  interested  in  collecting.      It  was 
a  very  enjoyable   part  of   my  life,    and  if  it  weren't  for 
Ploughshares,    I'd   certainly   go   on  with   it   today. 

Morris:       How  about  your  kids   during  the  art   phase.      Did  you  have  a  nanny 
for  them? 

Sally  L:      I  had  a  nurse  for   the  children  up  until  — [long  pause]  — 

until    the  youngest  ones  were  four  or  five.      Maybe.      I  had  a  nurse 
originally   from   the  time  the  babies  came  home.      Then  they  became 
sort  of  housekeepers;   I   don't  know  what  else  to   call   them.      I    did 
have  help.      Eventually,    there  was  a  housekeeper  and  an  au  pair  girl. 

Morris:        So  that  there  was  somebody   to  lend  a  hand — ? 

Sally  L:     No,    no,    no.      All    the   time — always.      No,    I   couldn't   possibly;  no,    I 
had  a   perfectly   luxurious   time. 

Morris:        Did  the  kids   go   to  the  Art  Institute  at  any   point? 

Sally  L:     Only  one   of   them.      They  were  all   interested  in  music,  which  I'm 
not  at  all. 


San  Francisco  Art  Museum  Board;   Performing  Arts  Program 


Morris:        Then,    is  there  anything  else  in — ? 

Sally  L:     About   the  arts — yes,    a  lot   of  art   things.      Oh   dear,    I    didn't 

realize  how    much.      Along  there  in  the  1960s   I  had  a  one-man  show, 
which  was  a  big  deal   for  me,   at  a   gallery.     And  then  I  had  a  lot 
of   other   things   I  was  involved  in,    but  then  I  got  married,    which 
was  in  1970.     Before  that  I  was  on  the    [San  Francisco]   Art  Museum 
Accessions   Committee  even  before  I  was  on  the  board.      Then  I  was 
appointed  to  the  board,   and  my   pal.  Bill  Roth,  was  the   chairman  of 
the  trustees  at  that  time.      Bill  and  I   felt  that  this  place  should 
not  just  be  another  place  for  white,   upper  middle-class   people. 
Old  story — new   setting.       [laughs] 

Morris:        You  wanted  some  light  added  to  this — ? 

Sally  L:     Darker   skin,    people  of   different   colors  and  different  economic 
backgrounds. 

Morris:       And  how   did  you  go  about — ? 


48 


Sally  L:      So,    I  started  there  a  program,   which  was  for   so-called 

"neighborhood  artists,"  and  that  of   course  was  a   term   that  really 
meant   poor  minority   artists,   but  one   used  the  word   "neighborhood" 
rather    than  "inner-city"  or   anything  that  neared  the  truth  of 
"slum."     And  so  we   started  the   program,    and   I'm   fortunately   not 
going  to  bore  you  with  details  about  it.      It  was  really   a  hard 
project  to  accomplish.      I   could  never  have   done  it  without  Bill 
Roth,  because    the  board  was  horrified  to  think  of   this  happening. 

Morris:        That  there  would  be  a  neighborhood  program? 

Sally  L:     Yes,    that  there  would  be  hanging  in  museum  walls  paintings. 

drawings   by   people  from   the  neighborhood.     But  a   special    gallery 
was  finally   made   for  a  series  of   changing  exhibitions.      We 
produced  ethnic  concerts  which  brought   people  to  the  museum  who  had 
never   come  before.      It  really  was  an  exciting  project,    and  I  was 
able  to  get   the  first  funding  from   the  San  Francisco  Foundation 
before  the  program  became  a  line  item  at  the  museum.      Although 
there  was  nobody  from   staff  or  board  to  actually   staff   this  with 
me.    I  was  somewhat  surprised  when,   with  Bill's  encouragement,    it 
actually   came   off.      I   started  by   trying  to   get   cooperation  from 
the  black  community   and  the  Chicano  community  and  so  forth.      That 
was  the  summer   I  was  a  "mother-fucker."     I  was  a  "mother-fucker" 
all   summer.       [laughs] 

Morris:        You  went  by  yourself? 

Sally  L:     By   myself,    yes.      I  was  trying  to  find  out  if   these   "neighborhood" 
artists  would  take   part  in  this   program,    that  is  if   they'd  be 
willing  to  show   at  the  museum. 

Morris:        Who  were   they? 

Sally  L:     I   remember  one   thing,    that   I  didn't  know    many   of   the  artists.      I 
started  at  the  Galleria   de  la  Raza  in  the   Mission.      And   then 
there  was  a   group  of  black  artists — very   political  black  artists — 
some  of   them   still  were  Black  Panthers.      They  had  sort  of  a  public 
gallery,   very   small,    in  someone's  house. 

And  the   place   I  knew   to   go  was  the  San  Francisco  Foundation. 
I  talked  to  Lew    [Llewellyn]   White  there,   who  was  tremendously 
sympathetic,    and  the  foundation   did  fund  it.      And  so.    the   board 
couldn't   turn  it   down,    because    they   couldn't   turn  down  the  money. 

They  were   dismayed,   at   the   board,    that  anything  like   that 
happened.       I   don't   think  they   were  always  because    (even  though   it 
exists)   it   did  become  a  very  successful   program.      I'm  not   saying 
necessarily   aesthetically.     At   the   outset   every   other   Sunday   there 
was  a  concert  or  a   performance  that  would  have   been  interesting  to 


Sally  L:      neighborhood   groups,    was  put  on   by   neighborhood    groups.      It  was   a 
tremendous   amount   of   neighborhood  talent,  particularly   in  the 
performing   arts. 

I    got  a  lot  of    help  from   somebody   who  had  a  program   of  this 
kind,   wonderful  museum  person  by   the  name   of  Walter  Hopps,  who 
was  at   the    Corcoran  at   the   time,   now   is   running  a  museum   in 
Houston.      I   don't  remember  who  else   I   talked  to  at  the   time — 
well,    I'm  sure  the  people  in  the  Art  Commission  and  the  people  who 
were  working  in  the  Zellerbach  Family  Fund  or  were  working  in  the 
neighborhood  arts   somehow. 

Morris:        Ruth  Asawa,    was   she   somebody   that  you  worked  with  at  all? 

Sally  L:     No.      Ruth  was   different.      Ruth  has   done   the  most   extraordinary 
job.    I   think   she's  terrific,    but,    although   she  has   spread  out   a 
little  bit  lately,    her  program  was  always  in  the  schools. 
However,    she's   my   friend  and  is  a  role  model    to   us   all. 

it 


Creating  New   Audiences 


Sally  L:      My  program,    the  museum's  program  it  became,    was  to  give  an 

opportunity   for   people  to  actually   present   themselves  in  public, 
outside   of   their  neighborhood.      Well,    once   they   got  a  feeling  of 
empowerment  that  they  could  show  in  a  museum,    what  happend  out  if 
it  is  that  it  really   happened;    through   that,    I   think,    you  began  to 
see  different   colors  of  skin  in  the  museum,    a  lot  more   people  who 
were  informally   dressed.      That  was  really  the  major  purpose,    to 
bring  an  audience  into  the  museums;   that  the  museum  was  really 
something  for   the  community  as  a  whole  to  enjoy   rather  than  just 
one  middle-class  and  upper-class   part   of   the   community. 

Morris:        Were  the  deYoung  and  the  Palace   of   the  Legion  of  Honor  watching 
with  interest  what  you  were   doing? 

Sally  L:      I    doubt   it.      I   don't  know    anything  about   that. 

We   started  it  and  we  just   sat   there   until  we   could   get 
somebody   to  run  the  thing.      The  whole  point  was,    heavens,    that  it 
finally  was   taken  on  by  museum   staff,   hired  to  run  the   program. 

One   of   the  things   that  happened  is  that  the  director   of   the 
museum,    Jerry  Norton,    just   paid  no  attention  to  it  at  all — couldn't 
care,    just    didn't   care,    just    didn't   care   about   it  at  all.      But   his 
assistant,    Mike   McCone,    did.      And  finally,    I   can't  tell  you  how 
many   months  later,    the  museum   hired  a   curator  for   this  program. 


50 


Sally  L:      The  program  has  now  ended  totally.      But  the  major   thing  that  it 
did,    and  it  is   still   true,    it   changed  the  audience — widened  the 
audience  enormously,   and  that  was  the  point.      It   became   known  that 
this  is  a   place   that  welcomed  people  of   different   color.     The 
reason  why    I  was   called  "mother-fucker"  in  the  first   place,    over 
and  over  again,    was   not,    I   think,    personal    ("mother- fucker"  became 
a   generic  term);   it  was   because   of   the  museum.      The  museum   meant 
to  these  minority   groups  that  it  was  just  a   snobbish  overgrown 
place  for   the   rich  honkys.      That  is  what  we  wanted  to   change, 
[laughs]      Now,   you  see  what   I'm   saying;  to  a   degree  we  did  change 
it.   yes. 

There  were  things   that   developed  out   of    that,    though.      One 
very  nice  thing  that   came  out  of   it  was  a   program   run  by   the 
Galleria  de  la  Raza  for   the  museum.      The  museum   owns  a  great 
collection  of   Mexican  art,    particularly   Mexican   drawings.      The 
museum   was  able  to  put   together  a  program,    and  get  it  funded  by   the 
National  Endowment  for  the  Arts,    to  send  to  small   museums.      It  has 
always  been  a   crusade   of   mine — an  untaken  crusade      [laughs]      that 
museums   should  lend  out  what   they  have.     Doesn't  it  annoy  you  when 
you  go   to  a  museum   and  you  see   the  things  that  they  own  and  they 
never  lend   them  to  anybody? 

I   guess  the  National   Endowment  for   the  Arts  paid  for  having 
the  things  put  in  frames  or  whatever,   and  we  got  this   crowd  from 
the  Galleria  de  la  Raza  to  be   in  charge   of   sending  these  shows 
around  to  different   community  museums  in  California  that  were 
particularly   interested  in  Mexican  art;   in  other  words,    where 
there  is   a  large   Mexican   population.      That's   a   beautiful    program. 
That's  what   I  would  consider,    in  its  teeny   way,    wonderful.      And  it 
also,    of   course,    is  very   beneficial   for   the   Mexican   community.      It 
gives  visibility   and  eventually,    you  know,    helps  the  museum 
itself.      Heavens,    it's  looking  for   grants   all    the    time.      It's    a 
nice   thing  to  have  that  on  your   record. 


51 


VII      MUSEUM  OF  MODERN  ART  RENTAL  GALLERY,    1978 


Support   for  Young  Unknown  Artists## 


Morris:        Then  you  got  involved  not   terribly  long  ago  in  starting  a  rental 

gallery. 

Sally  L:      Oh,    yes.      Now    that  will  be  nine  years  old  in  November.      That 
became  a  big,    big   deal. 

Morris:        As  a   revenue-producer,    or  as  visibility-enhancer? 

Sally  L:     Well,    it  became  a — the  museum  asked,   when  I  had  the  idea  of   doing 
it,    whether  we  would  become  part  of  the  museum.      Henry  Hopkins 
did.      In  starting  it,    I  didn't  think  of   it   as  part  of  the  museum, 
which  had  had  a   rental   gallery   up  until   about   ten  years  before 
that,    and  which  we — as  a  board  of   directors — had  voted  out  of 
existence  because   it  didn't  pay   for  itself.      Most  museums  have 
rental   galleries,    and  ours  was  one   of   the   oldest  in  the   country. 
So,    in  starting  this,    I  had  no  intention  of  being  part  of   the 
museum.      Then  Henry  asked  if   it  would  be.      It  was  not   started  to 
get   support  for  the  museum.      It  was   started  to  get  support  to 
young,    unknown  artists. 

Morris:        Through   the  San  Francisco  Art  Association  or  just — 

Sally  L:     Just  as  a  free-standing.      I  mean  that  was  our  idea  in  the  first 
place.     But   immediately  Henry   asked  if   it   could  be   a  part  of  the 
museum.      Everything  has   changed,    by   the  way,    since   I  have  left 
this.    I  should  say   it   changed  in  that  originally  we  were  to  give  a 
very  little  amount     of  money  to  the  museum,   which  did  nothing  for 
us,    by   the  way,    at  all.      I  paid  for  having  this  building  redone 
[at  Fort  Mason]   into  a   gallery.      What  happened  is   that  it  became 
almost  immediately  very  successful.     And  within  four  years — some 
graduate   student   did  a  paper,    can  you  imagine,    on  rental   galleries 
in  this   country,    and  it  was  far  and  away  the  most  successful 


52 


Sally  L:      rental   gallery   in   the   country.      And  today   it  is — I   think  we   got 

something — I   shouldn't   say   "we"  because   I'm   not  active  in  running 
it  any  more — something  like  about  two  and  a  half  million  dollars 
into   the   artists'    hands.       That's   not  an  exact   figure.       I   shouldn't 
really    give   but   it   is  very,   very   large   today.      It's  enormous. 
It's   got  a   staff   of   five  people.      All  who  have   to  be   paid  in 
museum  wages,   because  it's   part   of   the  museum.      The  museum   doesn't 
pay   for  any   of    it.      We  pay  back  the  museum,    but  the  museum  is 
unionized  so  it's  more   of   a   problem.      In  other  words,    the  rental 
gallery    can't   pay   anybody   to  sweep  the  floors  less  than  six  and  a 
half  dollars  an  hour,    if   I  remember  rightly.      Anyhow,    it  is 
tremendously   successful.      It's  just  amazing.      It's  much  more 
successful   since   I  left. 

Morris:        So  do   some  of   the  artist   sell  their  work  through  shows  at  the 
rental   gallery? 

Sally  L:      Selling  is  why   the  rental   gallery   is   so  successful,    because — 
Morris:        You  rent  to  buy. 
Sally  L:      You  rent  to  buy,    yes. 

[pause] 

Morris:        The  gallery   was  kind  of   in  at  the  beginning  of   Fort  Mason  too, 
wasn't  it? 

Sally  L:     Yes.    it  was.      It  was  the  first   space   that  was  redone  in  Fort  Mason 
It  was  nine  years  ago  that  we  opened.     We  opened  in  November  1978. 

Morris:        What  was  it  like  being  part  of   Fort  Mason  in  the  beginning  in  this 
community? 

Sally  L:     Well,    we  really  didn't  involve  ourselves  at  all,    and  I'm   afraid 
never  have.      I   think   there  are  lots   of   people  here  who  have 
involved  themselves  with  the  whole  community.      We  were  so  busy 
keeping  our  heads   above  water,  I   think,    in  those   days.      It  was   a 
black,    greasy    machine   shop.      Have  you  ever   seen  it?      It's   closed 
unfortunately  now— very,   very   nice.      It  really   is.      We  really   did 
a  very   nice — we  redid  it  extensively.      It's  terrific. 

Morris:        I  have  known  a  number  of   people  in  industry  who  have  maintained 
that  warehouse   space   is  very   efficient,   and  that  a   creative 
person   can  do  remarkable   things  with  it. 

Sally  L:     Well,    an  architect,    my   partner's  ex-husband,    redid  it. 

And   I  was   there  for  a  long  time.      I   started   Ploughshares,   you 
see,   while  I  was   there.      I   didn't   stop  working  for   the  museum 
entirely   until   last  September,    because   I  loved  it.      I   mean,    I'd 


53 


Sally  L:      go  out — when  I   started  Ploughshares.      I  worked   there  all  the  time. 
And  then  three  days,    then  I  went  to  two  days,    and  then  I  went  to 
two   days   a  month. 

Morris:        In  the  rental   gallery,    did  you  set  it  up  so   that  there  was  a 
review   panel   that  made   the   selections? 

Sally  L:  No,  Marian  and  I  selected  everybody;  the  museum  had  nothing  to  do 
with  it  all.  I'm  angered  because  they  take  so  much  money  from  us 
today  that  they  shouldn't. 

Morris:       Why   did  you  agree  to — 

Sally  L:      I   didn't  because   I'm  not  the  head  of   it  any   more.      I  wouldn't. 

Morris:        It's  a  recent   decision  for  it  to  be  a  part  of   the  museum? 

Sally  L:      No,    it  was  a  part  of   the  original   decision  that  ten  percent  of 
what  we  made   over   cost  would   go  to   the  museum. 

Morris:        As  your  donation? 

Sally  L:     As  our   donation.      Today   they   give  more  than  that.      The  museum 
wants   everything  that  isn't  expenses   to   go  to  it.      If   I  were 
there,    but   I'm  not  running  it  any   more — I  would  not  have  allowed 
that  to  happen,    because   I   think  it's  terrible. 

Morris:        And  your   partner  was — 

Sally  L:  Marian  Parmenter,  who's  still  there.  She  runs  it,  yes.  Marian 
was  an  old  friend.  I  asked  Marian  to  come  in  and  support  me,  I 
mean  to  j  oin  me  in  the  start. 

Morris:        The   two  of  you  started  it  without  a  board  of   directors? 

Sally  L:     Well,    the  board  of   directors  is  the  San  Francisco  Museum,   who's 
never  been  there.      They   treated  you  as   if  it  were   Sally's   cute 
little  toy. 

Morris:        That's  what   I'm   trying  to  get  clear  for  the  record.      It  was 
started  as  a  part   of   the  San  Francisco  Museum  of  Modern  Art. 

Sally  L:     Well,    it  was  started  as  part  of   the  San  Francisco  Museum,   with  the 
board  as   the   San  Francisco  Museum.      It's  an  adjunct  of   the   San 
Francisco  Museum.      However,    the  museum  never  had  anything  to  do 
with  it.      Once  a  year,    as  a  board  member  of  the  museum,    I  would 
give   a   report,    and  everybody   would  smile  and  say,    '"Oh,    it's   so 
cute  down  there.      I've  got  to  go,"  they'd  say.      That's  why  I  don't 
care  that   they   come,    I  don't   care  anyway.      What  I  object  to  is 
that  now   the  museum's   getting  all   this  money  without  ever  having 
done   anything.      Well,    does  it  really  matter? 


54 


Morris:        And  all    the  artists  are  from  San  Francisco? 

Sally  L:     They   at  least   started  by   being  all   artists  from   the  Bay   Area,    then 
we  vent  as  far  up  as   Sacramento.      But  we   couldn't  keep  it  supplied. 
so  we  went  to  other  places  and  now   most  of   it  comes  from   the  Bay 
Area,    but  once  a  year   (this  is  what  we   spend  money   on)  we   go  and 
bring  a   show    from   some  place  else.      I  think  the  first  show  was 
from  Santa  Fe. 

Morris:        From   their  rental   gallery? 

Sally  L:     No,    no.      We  would   go   to  the  galleries  and  go   to  the  artists  and 
pick  out   the   show.      Bring  it  from   there.      There's  a   show   every 
month.      It's  like   any    other   gallery.      It's   run  like   any    other 
commerical   gallery.      There  is  a   show,   a   gallery  opening  every 
month.      Almost  nothing  is   rented  at  the  openings,    although   the 
openings  are  jammed.      Isn't   that   strange? 

Morris:       Very. 

Sally  L:     And  that's  always  been  so. 


Business  and  Other   Clients 


Morris :       Where   did   the   customers   come  from? 

Sally  L:     They   are  not  people  who  wander  around  Fort  Mason,   and  you'd  think 
they  would  be.      They   come   there  because  they  want  to  rent  art. 
Over  the  years   they'd  come  from — people  like   myself  and  often 
young  people  who  are  just   getting  started,    or   people  who've  just 
gotten  their  first  apartment,   bachelors  and  women.     And  I   think 
quite  a  lot,  more  than  half ,  of   their  business   today   comes  from 
businesses.      It   started  off,    I  think,    with  law    firms.      And  there's 
one   after  another.     All    the  big  law   firms,   with  the  exception  of 
McCutcheon — the  biggest  law   firms  in  the  Bay  Area  certainly  come 
to   us.      Not  McCutcheon,    because   they   did  a  beautiful  job  in 
collecting  art  many   years  ago.      But   those   that  don't  have 
collections  have  all    come  to  rent  art. 

Morris:        All  business  from   San  Francisco  or  from — ? 

Sally  L:      The  Bay   Area.     Under   the  Gerbode   grant,    there's   a  woman  who  works 
just  on  businesses. 

Morris:        Developing  business   customers  for   the   gallery? 


55 


Sally  L:      Yes,    or  hanging  them.      That's  another   thing    we  always   did.     We  would 
go   to  a  business,    still  do  of   course,    and  look  around  and  decide  what 
they  need,    and   then  you  just   can't —     Then  bring  them   out  there  and 
show    them  what   they  need  for  this   spot  and  that  spot,   and  hang  it, 

Morris :        You've  made  a  real   contribution  to   the  artistic   taste   of    the   area. 

Sally  L:      I    don't  know,    because    I  would   say    it's  very   eclectic.      I   don't 

know    to   the  artistic  taste,   but   there  is  no  question  that  it  has 
made — just  tremendously  helpful   to  young  artists — tremendously 
helpful.     But  it  made   them   teach  about  it  in  all   the   courses  in 
the  University   of   California  and  more  than  the  universities  of 
California.      There's  a   course  which  tells  you  about  our  rental 
gallery,    because  it  has  been  a  place  for  young  artists. 

I  don't  know  how   many  artists  have   gone  from  what   I   call   "us", 
for  the  moment,  to  commercial   galleries,    one  after  another — just 
this  one  and   that  one. 

Morris:        But   that  means   that   there  has  to  have  been  a  corresponding 
increase  in   the  market. 

Sally  L:     Well,    there  is  a  great  increase   in  the  market,   but   it  also  is  that 
Marian  and   I — well,    I   didn't   take  a   salary.      One  year  I   did  take 
salary,    yes,    but   usually    I   didn't.      The   galleries   can't  afford  the 
gallery   personnel   to   go  around   all   over  the   state  and  look  for 
.art.      So  they   could  come   to  us   and  go   through  our   stacks   and  see 
what   they   thought  was   good.      I   can't   speak  for  any   paintings   there 
now,    because   I  don't  pick  out   the  art  any   more  at  all. 

Morris:        Did  you   go  out  and  look  for — 

Sally  L:     Oh,    yes   I   did. 

Morris:        That's  a   tremendous   amount  of  energy. 

Sally  L:     Yes,    it  is.      It's  tiring,  but  it's  terrific,   yes.     That's  why  I 

actually  kept  up   doing  it;   until   this   September,    I  would  at  least 
twice   a  month  go  out  with  Marian,    and  look  at  art,    pick  art,    and 
I'd  always  hang  the   shows.     Every   third  Monday   of   every  month  the 
show   has   to  be  hung. 

Morris:        How   did  you  learn  about  hanging  shows.    I'm   told  that  is  quite  a 
skill. 

Sally  L:      Marian  had  worked  in     and  owned  an  art  gallery,  actually,    and  long 
been  a  fan  of   the  arts.      I   don't  know. 

Do  you  know   all   the  people  in  the  world  who  hang  out  their 
shingles,     "Art   Consultants,"  and   they   don't  have  any   background  at 
all,    at  all.      I   used  to  hear  them   hold  forth  to  their  clients  when 


56 


Sally  L:      they   came  in.      They   all  had  one  rule:        don't   give   the   client  what 
he  wants.       [laughs]      These  heads  of   banks  would   come  in  and  they'd 
say   sort  of   shyly  to  their  horrible  little  art   consultants,    "I 
really   like   that   painting.      It   has   flowers   in  it."     And   she'd 
say.    "No.    no   flowers."      [laughs]      Can't  you  hear  it?      Oh.    it's 
funny.      Anyway,    I  worked  there,    as   I   say,    up  until  very    recently, 
up  until  very   recently. 

Morris:        That  sounds  to  me  like   a  professional   commitment. 

Sally  L:      Yes,  well,  when  I   started  Ploughshares   there  wasn't  any — 

Morris:        When  we   started  this  discussion  you  said,    "What  is  the  difference 
between  a  professional   and  a — " 

Sally  L:     Oh,   I  see.      Oh,  yes.     My  profession  as  an  artist.     That's  right. 
I   don't  know  what  is  professional.      I   prefer  not  to  know. 

Morris:        Well,     there's  a   certain  classiness  to  being  a  very   productive  non- 
professional. 

Sally  L:  Do  you  think  so? 

Morris:  Yes. 

Sally  L:  I   always  wanted  to  be   a  professional,    and  I  never  have  been. 

Morris:  But   some   people,    as  you  say   the   "art   consultants" — 

Sally  L:      Pseudo-prof essional si      I  know   I'm  not  professional   in  what  I  do 
today. 

Morris:        Is   there  anything  else  we  should  include   about  your  experiences  in 
the  art  world? 

Sally  L:     No,    I've  had  so  much  pleasure  in  the  art  world. 
Morris:       Why   don't  we   stop  here  for  today. 


Aside   on  Ploughshares  Meeting  in  New  York,    September  1987 
[Interview  3:      September  29,   1987 ]## 


Morris:        You  were   telling  me  about   the   Ploughshares   party   in  New   York. 

Sally  L:     Yes.     We  were  faced  with  our  own  success  is  all   I   can  tell  you. 

It's   embarrasing  even  to  admit   this.      This   event  was   so  successful 
that   it  was  jammed.      I  think  I   may  have  told  you  that  we  had  to 


57 


Sally  L:     write  to  something  like  800  people  and  tell   them   they   couldn't  come. 
I   don't   mean  that  all  800  would  have   come.      I'm   only   saying   that 
before  they   could  answer  their  invitation  we  had  to  write  them  and  say 
they   couldn't   come,    because  ten  days  after   sending  the  invitations, 
there  were  280   acceptances,    and  we  could  only  have  150  be  there.      So, 
that  in  itself,   you  think,    "How  wonderful.      You  know  how   hard  it  is 
to  get  people  in  New   York  to  come  to  see  Ploughshares.      Who's  ever 
heard  of   Ploughshares?      They  had  heard  of,   many   people   certainly  had 
heard  of   the  person  at  whose  house  it  was  held,    but  what  happened  is 
that  the   crowds  were  such — limousines  drove  up  and  drove  away!      And 
it  was   so  crowded  that  you  couldn't   talk  to  people.      I  would  hear — 

Morris :        Did  you  get  to  make  your — ? 

Sally  L:      I   made   my   little  tiny   speech.      Everyone  was  stacked  right  up  the 
middle  of    this  enormous  living  room.      Then  the  next  day,    I   called 
in — two  very   generous  contributors  to  Ploughshares,    who  gave  me 
bloody   hell   because  nobody  had  made  a  big  enough  pitch.     And  Lew 
and  I,   we  make   money,    I  think  by   being  earnest,    good  friends 
[laughs] — never   directly   asking  for  it.      I   don't   know.      There's 
something  about  both  of   us.      Do  you  know  Lew  [Lewis]    Butler? 

Morris :        Certainly  by   reputation. 

Sally  L:  Yes,  yes.  Because  he's  been  in  public  life  forever,  and  a  public 
servant  forever,  and  certainly  had  to  raise  money,  but  he's  never 
directly  asked  for  it.  [laughs] 

Morris:        That  may  be  a  technique  to  be   studied. 

Sally  L:     Well,    it  obviously   was   not  in  this   case.      We  certainly   could  have 
gotten  one   of  our  big  contributors  to   get   up  and  say,    "I   gave   to 
Ploughshares,    because   I   think  it's  the  place  where  you  can  invest 
your  money  and  prevent  nuclear  war  in  the  most   practical  manner." 
But   nobody   said  that.       [laughs]      So  did  we  make  any   money  out  of 
it — I   don't  know.      And  that  was   the  point. 

Morris:        That's  too  bad  to  have  more  people  than  you  can  really  buttonhole. 

Sally  L:     Buttonhole!      I   couldn't   say  hello  to   people,    as  you  know.      The 
other  thing  is,    my   staff   is  too  young  to  know  what  radical  chic 
means,    but  many   people  around  the  room   said,    "I  haven't   seen 
radical   chic  like   this   since   the  sixties."     And  it  was. 

Morris:        And  it   still   exists? 


Sally  L:     Oh,     it   still  exists.      There  were  college   presidents  there — I  don't 
know — there  was  the  head  of  the  public  library;    Paul   Moore,    the 
bishop  of  New  York,  etc.,  etc.     All  these,  and  a  lot  of  sort  of 
society — not   society,   but   people  who  appear — like  the   president 
and  his  wife   of   the  Metropolitan  Museum,    things  like   that.      And 


58 


Sally  L:      then  there  was  the  Council   of   Foreign  Relations  and  his  wife — 

people  who  are  really   personages  in  New   York.      But   I   couldn't  talk 
to  any   of   them.      Now    that's  not  true.      Of   course,    I  talked  to  one 
or   two.      Plus   the  reason — I  won't  go  on  and  on  about — the  reason 
one   contributor  gave  was  very,    very   droll:      "I've  never   seen   three 
such   rich   realtors   in  one   room."      [laughs]      I   didn't  even  know   who 
they  were.      I  later  learned  what   their  names  were. 

Morris:  This  sound  like  people  that  were  not  necessarily  on  the  original 
guest  list. 

Sally  L:     Oh  yes,    they  were,    but  they  were  people  whose  names  had  been  sent 
to  us   by   one   or  another   person.      I   didn't  know  who  they  were.      If 
you're   a   big  outfit — if  you're   the  University   of    California, 
you've   got  a,    even  The  Bancroft  Library — 

Morris:  You  have  a  research  group  that  puts  together  lists  of  people  for 
such  gatherings — 

Sally  L:      [agreeing  sounds] 

Morris:    •>  — and  information  about   them.      Also  flock  of  lesser  luminaries  who 
are  assigned  to   go  out  and  buttonhole  the  important   guests. 

Sally  L:     Yes. 

Morris:        Obviously  you're  going  to  have  some  fascinating  follow-up  work. 

Sally  L:     Well,    I've   done  the  follow-up  work.      Yes.      We're   going  to  have 
some  fascinating  follow-up  work,    there's  no  question  about   it. 

Morris:        Obviously   they  wanted  to   come. 

Sally  L:  Well,  I  think  they  wanted  to  see  the  house.  They  wanted  to  hear 
Tom  Wicker  speak,  who  gave  a  terrible  talk.  I've  heard  him  talk 
very  well;  I  think  he  just  gave  a  canned  speech.  Anyway,  we'll  see. 

This  one  man  said,   and  he  was   so  positive — I   don't  mean  to 
sound  like   a  country   girl,    I'm  not,    but   I'm  not  used   to  very,    very 
large   offices.      I've  never  been  married  to  a   businessman,     I    don't 
have  any  businessmen  friends,    and  that  was  not  my   milieu 
particularly.      So  when  you  get  into  some   of   these   offices,   and 
there  are  literally  miles,    miles  of  young  men  sitting  at  computers 
doing  something  before  you  finally   get   to  an  office,   but  in  this 
case   it's   got  absolutely  priceless  art.      In  the  middle  of   our 
conversation  somebody   comes  in  with  a   takeover. 

Morris:        Oh.    marvelous. 

Sally  L:     That  this   company   has  been  able  to  effect.    I  don't  mean  that  it 
was   taking  over   that — 


59 


Morris:        One   that  it  has   succeeded. 

Sally  L:      It  succeeded.     And  this  man  said,   "I'll  give  you,"  I  mean  he's  so 
tough,   "I'll  give  you   $25,000,    that'll  pay  to  do  the  thing  right. 
But  you   do   it  within  six  months."     My  God,    well,    we   can't   possibly 
do  it.       [laughs]      Oh,    dear.       I   don't  mean   to    sound   like 
Cinderella,    but    it's   funny. 

Morris:        That's   nice   to  have    somebody — 

Sally  L:      Oh,    it  is.      Oh,    it  is.      No,    he  won't  give  it  to  us  unless  we  do 
it  as  he    says  within   six  months.      I    could  never   get   the   board — 
you  know,    our  board,    busy   board  of   professors  and  what-not  to  come 
East  again  to   do   this   in   six  months?      No. 

Morris:        He  was   giving  you  the  money   to  do   the — 

Sally  L:      To   do   the   party  again  the  way  he   said. 

Morris:        I   see.      Maybe  he  wanted  his  bright  young  men  to  organize  it. 

Sally  L:      Maybe.     That's  an  idea  I  never  thought  of.      It's  a  little  late. 

[laughs] 

Morris:        Well,    people  knew  you  were  in  town, anyhow. 


60 


VIII     GIVING   AND  RAISING   MONEY   IN  THE  1960S  AND   1970S 


Fair  Housing  Legislation 


Morris:        I  wanted  to  go   back  a  ways  this  morning  and  pick  up  with  some  of   the 
things  you  were   doing  in  the   civil   rights,    civil  liberties  areas.      We 
talked  a  little  bit,    but   I   don't   think  it  was  on  tape.      In  1964,    you 
were  interested  in  the  fair  housing  legislation  to  do  away  with 
red-lining? 

Sally  L:      Yes. 

Morris:        How   did  you  get  involved  in  that? 

Sally  L:      I   think  when  one's   involved  in  an  issue,   you  know,    someone 
you  know  phones  and  asks  how  interested  you 
are,    then  you're  asked  to   go  on  a   committee  and  do,    and 
then  you  go  around  to  your  friends  and  try   and  raise  money 
for  it.      It's  as  simple  as  that.     I  don't  think — it's  not  in 
any   policy      aking  way   at  all.     Governor  Brown  was  the  head  of    that. 
Pat   Brown. 

Morris:        Yes.      He  was  very   much   interested  in  it;  he  had   campaigned  for   the 
fair   employment  legislation  that  was   passed  in  1959. 

Sally  L:      Isn't  your  memory  just  wonderful.      I   meant   to   take   these   notes  out 
this  morning.     We  had  a   crisis  around  here   that's   stopped  me  from 
doing  things   that — 

Morris:        Had  you  known  Pat  Brown  when  he  was  attorney   general — or  here 
in  San  Francisco? 

Sally  L:     No.    I  hadn't.      I   think  he  took  my   name  off  a  list. 

Morris:        I  see.      From   some  other  committee,    the   Council    of   Civic  Unity   or 
something  like   that? 


61 


Sally  L:      Think  of  what  a  small   community  it  is.      In  those   days  it  was 

really  a  small  community  of  people  who  were  interested  in  these 
issues,    and  who  had  a  little  money. 

Morris:        Do  I   remember  this  was  the  time  you  said  somebody  told  you  to 
write  a   check? 

Sally  L:     That's   right.      We  went  to  a  meeting,    a  very   small  meeting.      I 

mean,    maybe  there  were  fifty  people  there  to  talk  about  raising 
money    for   the  effort.      I  remember  that  occasion  really  well.      I 
guess   everybody   there  was  asked  what  they   could   give.     And  I   gave 
$250,    and  my   pal   nudged  me   and  said,    "Come  on.      Give  $500."     And 
as   I   said,    that  was   the  first   time   I  ever   gave   $500   away. 

Morris:        To  a  political   cause? 

Sally  L:     To  any.       I  really   think  in  a  single  shot.      That  may  not  be  true; 
to  the   community   chest,    I  think  I  always,    always,    always — it  was 
called  the  community   chest  in  those  days — always  gave  $1000, 
whatever  it  was. 

Morris:    ~   It's  kind  of  like   paying  taxes. 

Sally  L:      That's   right,    although  I  subsequently,    not  many  years  later, 
learned  something  that  is  important  to  me,    which  was  that  one 
could  be  a  good  citizen  and  decide  what  one  wanted  to  support 
rather   than  necessarily   supporting  the  UJA    [United  Jewish  Appeal], 
for  example,  which  I  was  never  very   interested  in.     But  as   a  Jew, 
certainly,    I   guess  I  just  wrote  my   $1000  check.      Instead,    really 
stick  to  what  one  is  focused  on. 

Morris:        That  sounds  like  you  didn't  become  active  in  the  community  chest 
as  a   committee  lady   or — 

Sally  L:      I   think  my   first  no-no.      Never. 

Morris:        For  many   people   that's   the  beginning  of    their   civic   awareness. 
Did  anybody   ever  ask? 

Sally  L:     Oh  yes.      I  mean,    when  I  first  became  a  young  matron,    or  whatever 
you  call  it,   I'm  sure  I  was  asked,  and  I  think  I  did  spend  a  year 
going  around  asking  for  money.      I  think  one  was   supposed  to — I 
totally  forget — get  $200  from  someone.      And  someone  would  say, 
"I'll  give  you  $10."     And  I'd  say,   "What  can  I  do  for  you?" 
[laughs]      I  realized  that   charity  began  to  take  on  some  flavor 
after  a  while.      I  wasn't  just   something  that  one  did. 

Morris:       Because  it  was — 

Sally  L:     Because   it  was  the  right  thing  to  do,   yes. 


62 


Morris:        Did  you  do  the  Junior  League  too? 

Sally  L:     No.    because   they    didn't  at   that   time,    they   didn't   take. 

interestingly,    they   didn't  take  Jews  in  the  Junior  League.       In 
fact.    I  have  no  idea,    Gabrielle,    how   long  ago   they   began  to  do   so. 
or  whether   they   even  do  so  today  in  San  Francisco.      I  know    they 
didn't  for  many  years.      In  fact,    I  had  a   friend  who  resigned  or 
made  a   cause   celebre  out  of   it.   and  then  resigned  because  they 
wouldn't.      She  used  me   as  an  example. 


American  Civil  Liberties  Union 


Morris : 

Sally  L; 
Morris : 
Sally  L; 


Morris : 
Sally  L: 


Morris : 
Sally  L: 


But  you  did   go  on  the  board   of   the  ACLU    [American  Civil  Liberties 
Union]? 

Much,  much  later.      That  was  in  the  early  1970s. 
What  was   going  on  then  with  the — 

Early   1970s — probably  1975.      What  was   going  on  then  is   interesting. 
I  was  on  it  and  found,    to  my  absolute  horror,   women  were  not 
encouraged  to  speak  in  the  board  meeting.      And  lawyers  were  not 
encouraged — I   shouldn't   say   they  weren't   encouraged   to    speak, 
lawyers   talk  so  much,    vieing  with  each  other  on  legal  niceties — 
but   there  was  nothing  talked  about  in   policy.      Virtually   nothing. 
This  is  entirely  differently  than  the  ACLU  had  been  traditionally 
in  San  Francisco.      There  is   a  lawyers'   committee  that  meets,    I 
think,    frequently   to  go   through  what  lawsuits  they   should  take   up. 


That  was   my  next  question, 
which  person  they — 


What  the   board's  role  is  in  deciding 


As   I   understand  it,   and  I   resigned  after  two  or  three  years 
because   I  found  it  was  fruitless.      As   often  in  my  life.    I've   done 
my   little  piece   and  then  gone   away.      I  did  my  little  piece  there — 
I'll   tell  you  in  a  minute.      But   there  is   a  lawyers'   committee  and 
I   really   can't   speak  for  what  happens   there  today,    although   I'm 
very   close   to  Dorothy    [Erlich],   who  is   the  absolutely  superb 
northern   California   director.      I'm   sure  that  she.    as  a  non-lawyer, 
sees   to  it   that   it   isn't   only    a  legal    discussion   there.      I    don't 
know    how   interested  you  are  in — but  among  the  members  of   the  board 
there  was  a  man  by  the  name   of  Anthony  Amsterdam.      I   don't  know   if 
you  ever  ran  into  him.      He  was  a  professor  at  Stanford. 

Yes,    he's   a  famous  lawyer  from  Stanford. 

Famous  lawyer  from   Stanford.      He's  now   back  East — articulate,    and 
long-winded.        And  for   the  legal   profession,    essentially   the 
progressive  or  left-wing  legal   profession — to  be   in  the  room  with 


63 


Sally  L:      him,    and  to  be  able  to  show   off  to  him  is   ultimate  ambition.      So 
that's  what  the  meetings   consisted  of.      If   Tony   came,    he'd  make   a 
speech  and  all   the  other  lawyers  there  would  vie  to  show    that 
they  knew   as  much  as  he  did,    or  they  understood  what  he  was 
saying.      But  you  can  picture  this,    I   think.      And  women,    I  found — 
well,    there  was  one  woman,    who's  in  education.      I  can't  remember 
her  name — Dorothy — wonderful,  wonderful   black  woman.      She's 
married  to  Chuck,    who  was  actually  chair  of  the  board  at  San 
Francisco  Foundation  until   recently.      She's  an  educator. 

Morris:        Patterson?      From  Oakland. 

Sally  L:      Patterson.       I  just   can't  believe  your  memory.      Dorothy   Patterson 
had  been  there  many,    many,    many  years.      She's  a  very   smart, 
attractive,    able  human  being — wonderful  lady,    wonderful  lady.      She 
totally — it  had  taken  her  about  three  years  or  more  to  figure  out 
how    she  as  a  non-lawyer  could  interject  herself  in  the 
conversation,    bring  it   back  to  essentials  and  be  listened  to.      But 
I   wasn't  able   to  spend  the  three  years,    nor  was   I  bright  enough, 
[laughs] 

Morris:        Did  she  pick  some  particular  issues? 

Sally  L:     No,    it  wasn't  that.      It  was  just  that   she  wanted — see,    the  way 

it's  set  up,  and  it's  years  since  I've  resigned,  is  that  there  is 
a  lawyers'  meeting,  and  it  takes  place  very  often.  At  which  point 
they  decide  the  legal  issues  of  what — what  it  should  be  is  policy 
is  set  by  the  board,  and  then  the  lawyers  decide  whether  there  is 
a  legal  suit  in  it,  who's  going  to  take  it  up,  and  how  it's  going 
to  be  done,  and  all  the  strategy.  And  apparently  they  enjoy  that 
enormously.  I  can  imagine  they  do.  But  it  shouldn't  then  go  to 
the  board  to  go  through  the  same  stuff.  Obviously  they  can  go  on 

and  on  and  on — you  know    how    much  they  enjoy .      So  policy  was  not 

discussed,   at   that   time.      The   chairman  was  probably  over— ridden 
too  by   the  lawyers. 

Morris:       Who  was   the   chairman  at   that   time? 

Sally  L:     Dick  Delancy. 

Morris:       Was  this  when  Ernest  Besig  was  director? 

Sally  L:     No,   you  see,    and  that's  exactly  what   changed  it.      Now   Ernest 

Besig  had  been  out  for  years,   and  when  Ernest  Besig  was  there,    I 
think  it  was  a  very   different  cup  of   tea.      It  was   there  though,    I 
believe,    that  I   met,    or  at  least  cemented  a  friendship  which  is  of 
enormous  meaning  to  me.     He  is  now   one  of  my   closest  friends,   who 
was  the  second-in-command  at  ACLU,    a  man  by  the  name  of  Tom 
Layton,  who  runs   the  Gerbode   Foundation,    that  is  one   of   the  team 
to  put   this  project   together  to  do  oral   histories  of   people  on 


64 


Sally  L:      foundations.     And  Tom  is  on  my  board,   and  we  have  an  infinite 
number  of   common  interests,    including  traveling  together.     But 
that  is  where  we  first   became  very,  very,   very   good  friends. 

He  had  been  the  head  of   Coro  Foundation  when  he  had  come 
there. 

Morris:       Was  he  a  Coro  graduate  himself? 

Sally  L:      I   don't   think  so.      But  Tom,    as  you  may   know — I   don't  know   anybody 
who  knows  him  nationally  who  doesn't  feel   that  he  is  one  of   the 
extraordinary   people  in  the  foundation  world.      I'm  sure   that 
there's   simply  no  question  that  he  gets  ten  times  as  much  money 
into  worthy  and  innovative  causes  from   organizations  and 
individuals,    and  starts  ideas  way   beyond  Gerbode's  level   of 
giving.      He's  an  extraordinary   person.      Now   he  is   someone   that 
should  be   interviewed.       [laughs] 

Morris:        I  hope  we'll   be  able  to.      Is  your   perspective  that  its  his   ability 
to  get  other  people  to  come  in  on  a  good  idea  or  is  it  more  his 
ability   to   say,    "This  really  needs   doing. "? 

Sally  L:     Both.      Absolutely   both.      He  is  the  most   interesting,    and 

intelligent,    and  broad-gauged  person,    who  is  really  without  ego. 
I   don't   think  I've  met   anybody   like   that.      He   seems  to  have  this 
odd  characteristic — I   should   say   unique   characteristic  of   being 
selfless.      He  really  just  wants  the  best  for  whatever  he  sees 
needs  it.     His  mind  is  always  working  on  trying  to  find  a  way 
around  to  do   something  for   somebody   and  get  other  people  to 
support  it  as  well   himself. 

Morris:       Was  this  his  role  on  the  ACLU  board? 

Sally  L:     No,    I   think  his  role  on  the  ACLU  board  was  fundraising  actually, 

and  administration,    because  there  was  an  executive  director,    which 
he  was  not.      He  was  an  assistant  to  the  executive   director.      I 
never  know  what  titles  are. 

Morris:        He  was  on  the   staff   of   the  ACLU? 

Sally  L:     He  was  a   staff.      But  he  is  an  absolutely   fascinating  person. 

Morris:        That's  quite  a   distance  from  the   Coro  Foundation  to  the  ACLU. 

Sally  L:     I  don't  think  so  really.     No,   I  don't  really  think  that  is  true. 
No.      Well,    maybe  it  is  somewhat,    except   that  you'd   say   that    civil 
liberties  is  an  important   thing  for   the  civic  servants  to  have 
under   their  belt. 

Morris:        I  was  wondering  if   the  years   that  you  were  on  the  board,    the  ACLU 
was  working  on  any   aspect  of   the   death   penalty? 


65 


Sally  L:      Yes,    but   the  ACLU  here,    and  you  know    I  just  hesitate  to   say. 

because    I   don't  know   what's  happened  in  the  last  ten  years.      I 
support  it  heavily,    but  I   don't  follow   exactly  what  they   do.      I 
think  the  death-penalty   projects  are  mostly  taken  care  of 
nationally,    or  mostly  worked  on  nationally,    coordinated 
nationally.      But   I  know    that  there  is  someone  in  New  York  who  for 
decades  has  been  the  head  of   the   department  working  on  the   death 
penalty. 

What  I   did  when  I  was  there  that  was  at  all  useful,    feeling 
outraged  at  the  way  women  were  treated  and  also,    probably,    again 
like   a  debutante,    from   personal   pique — couldn't  think  of   anything 
smart  enough  to  say — what  was  I  going  to  sit  there  for?      The 
meetings  lasted  six  hours.      They're  always  at  night  on  Market 
Street.      We'd  be   there  from   eight  to  one,    drowning  on  legal 
language — 

Morris:        Staying  awake  was  a   chore. 

Sally  L:     Oh,    staying  awake  was  a   chore.      And  I   do  have  to  say   that  one 
after  another  woman,    some  of  whom  I  suggested  be  put  on  the 
board,    has  had  this   same  problem   for  years.      But  we  did   (and  that 
was  my   part  in  it)   a  few   of   us    (and   I'm  not   going  to  remember 
their  names)   put   together  a  program  for  women,    which  they  had  not 
had  at   the  ACLU — equal   rights  for  women. 

There  was  a  law   professor,    she  was  at  San  Francisco  State. 
There  was  a  committee  of  us  that  finally  were  able  to  talk  the 
board   into  having  a   special   section  on  women's  rights.      And  then  I 
went   down  to  raise  some  money  for  it,    or  helped  raise  the  money 
for  it,   which  we  got  from   the  San  Francisco  Foundation.      Those 
were   the   old  days. 

Morris:       What  was   the  project   to  do — take   cases  and — ? 
Sally  L:      Yes,   and  hire   somebody  on  staff. 


Budget  Needs  vs.    Innovation:      Sierra  dub  and  ACLU 


Sally  L:      I   needn't  tell  you,    all   these   things   are  wonderful    to  give  vocal 

and  written  praise   or  support  to  these  things  by  institutions,   but 
it's  the  budget  that  counts. 

Recently,    I  hope   I  don't  diverge   too  much,    a    [Ploughshares] 
grant  that  I'm  very  pleased  with,   which  we  just   gave  in  New   York — 
for  years,    members  of   the  Sierra  Club  had  been  trying  to  get  their 
board  to  take  a  position  on  the  prevention  of  nuclear  war  as   being 
an  environmental   issue.      And  with  spotty   success,    I  would  say. 


66 


Sally  L : 


Morris: 


Sally  L: 


Yes.    they  would  sign  the   papers   saying  the  Sierra   dub  was  against 
nuclear  war  because   of   nuclear  winter  or  something  that's  equally 
bread-and-water.      Or  they'd — I   think  last  year,    I  know    they   did 
because   they   used  our  information — they   sent  out   to  all  their 
chapters  information  on  the  comprehensive  test  ban.    and   said  that 
they  were  behind  putting  out  a  comprehensive  test  ban. 

It  was  a  very  strong  committee  within  the  Sierra  (Hub  here  in 
San  Francisco   that  has  been  trying  to  work  on  this  process  over 
the  years,    without   great  success.      Finally   they   talked  the   board 
into  polling  the  membership  as  to  whether  this  would  be  a  member- 
supported  thing,  which  means:     would  there  be  something  taken  from 
a  very   large   budget  to  work  on  this  issue,    and  the  answer  was  no. 
So.  without   going  through  the  intricacies,    this  wonderful 
committee  was  able  to  get  the  board  to  agree  to  say.   Okay,   we'll 
put  in  a  lobbyist,   in  their  very  large  and  very   competent  office 
in  Washington,    if  you  get   somebody   outside   to  pay   for  it.      In 
other  words,    it  won't   come  out  of —     That  is  like  the  ACLU.      We 
had  to  go  out  and  raise  the  money   from  the  San  Francisco 
Foundation.      It   didn't   come  out  of   the  ACLU.      Do  you  follow — ? 

What  you're   saying  that   it's  hard   to  get  an  organization  to  take 
money  out  of   the  existing  budget  to— 

That's  when  they  really  have  real  commitment  to  something  is  when 
they're  going  to  take  it  out  of  the — 


Morris:        Cut   down  something  they're  already   doing  or — 

Sally  L:      That's   right,    or  they  have  to  raise  money  for  it,   which  they   did 
in  this   case. 

H 

Sally  L:      The  fundraising  department  quite  correctly  doesn't  want  the  mother 
institution,    or  a  group  from  the  mother  institution  to   go   to   same 
foundation  that  the  mother  institution  is   going  to  for  general 
support.      Isn't   that  right?      I  had  that  experience  a  lot  in  my 
life.      How    to  get  around  that  in  art  situations  too — recently. 
Ploughshares  in  its  last  board  meeting  was   thrilled  to  be  able  to 
pay   for   this  lobbyist. 

Morris:        Having  tried  to  get  the  Sierra  Club  to  take   this  position  for 
sometime? 

Sally  L:     Well,    yes.      Not  actively.      I  mean  there's  no  way  we — we're  not 

representative   of   the  Sierra   Club.      Funders   really    shouldn't   try 
and  influence   people,    except — [laughs] — you  know,    I   mean  not  in  a 
direct  way.      I   think  it  is  a  mistake.      I  really    do.      Certainly 
it's  a  mistake   for  funders  to  dictate  programs. 


67 


Morris:        It's  an  interesting  area,    though,    when  you're  in   the   business   of 
funding  a   particular  kind  of   activity,   people  will —     One  of   the 
questions  I  wanted  to  ask  you  about  later  is  the  kind  of  ongoing 
relationship  that  develops  with  an  organization  that  one  has  had  a 
funding  relation  with. 

Sally  L:     That's  a  very   delicate  thing. 
Morris:        Well,    going  back   to   the  ACLU — 

Sally  L:      So,    sure,    that  was  an  instance — I  was  just   giving  the  Sierra  CLub 
as  another  instance   of   the   same  thing,    that  ACLU  wouldn't   pay  for 
a  women's  program.     By  pay    for  a  women's  program,    it  meant  hiring 
an  administrator  and  giving  some  office  space  and,    I   guess,    some 
back-up.       I   don't  remember,    I  think,    I  think  a   secretary,    I  forget. 


Morris:        Yes,   you  started  with — 

Sally  L:      I   remember — yes,    one   staff  person, 
with  an  enraged  feminist — 

Morris:        These  were  the  clients? 


It  was  also  difficult  working 


Sally  L:      These  were  the  feminists  on  this  committee  that — I  don't  recall 

exactly  what.      I  just  recall   my  husband  being  enraged  because  his 
secretary   had  to  go   through   some  kind  of   clearance  to  show   that 
she  was   clean  enough  as  a  feminist.     You  know,    that  her  politics 
were  absolutely  perfect,    pure.      She'd  never  gone  out  with  a  man — 
[laughs] — or  whatever.      Never  worn  a  bra.       [laughs]      Nonetheless, 
that  was  what  happened  out  of    that,    and  I   don't  even  know    if   the 
program   still   goes  on,    but  for  a  while  it  was  very  successful. 


Writing  and  Reviewing  Grant  Applications;      San  Francisco 
Foundation  and  Ploughshares 


Morris         When  you  were  looking  for  funding,    did  you  have  to  do  a  formal 
proposal — ? 

Sally  L:      Yes. 

Morris:        — or   could  you  just   go   talk  to  John  May,   who  knew  your  reputation? 

Sally  L:      I  think  we   did  a  formal   proposal,    but  in  those   days,   as   I  recall, 
and  I   don't  recall   in  this  one,    but   I  do  on  others,    they   were 
wonderful  about   saying,    "This  is   the  wrong  way   to  write  it." 

I   believe   so   strongly   that  one   shouldn't  judge   a  proposal   on 
how   it's  written.      Don't  you? 


68 


Morris:        You  must  have  gotten  the  idea  across,  even  though  it  wasn't 
written  in  the  best   of   grantmaking  style. 

Sally  L:      Yes,    for  them.      But  you  know    when  you  are   after  money,    very    often 
you  write  in  a   proposal  and  it's  discarded  by  some  foundations 
because  it's  not  written  in  exactly   the  form    they  like,    or  it's 
boring,    or  it's  over-written,    or  it's  too  long,    too  short — 

Morris          Or  it   doesn't   tell    them  what  they  want  to  know. 

Sally  L:     B  ut  it  often  has  to   do   with  the  writing,    rather  than  the  actual 
facts  of   the   case. 

Morris:        Is  that  your  experience   now? 

Sally  L:      Oh,    yes,    it  is  definitely   my  experience   now.      Although,    as  I  think 
I  m  ay  have  said  to  you  before,   we  are  so  lucky  on  the   board  in 
having  Tom   Lay  ton  and  Lew    Butler,    who  are  so  experienced  as 
foundation  people,  and  Bill  Roth  when  he's  here.      Because,   being 
so   experienced  they    are  able  to  be   entirely   flexible.       They   insist 
on    flexibility;    although    the  legal    processes  have    no    flexibility 
whatsoever,    or  the  ethical  ones,   or  the  way   one  treats  one's 
clients.      That's  probably  a  whole  other  subject.      But  we  have   been 
told  often  that  we're  unlike   most  foundations  in  the  way   we  treat 
our   clients. 

Morris:        If  you  see   something  of   merit  in  that  proposal — 

Sally  L:     Go  back  to  them  and  say.  "Do  you  really  mean  this?  "  or  "Do  you 

really   mean  that?"  or  "Couldn't  you  write  it  more  clearly  here." 
And  actually  since  we  rewrite,   which  is  different  from   many 
foundations,   though  many  of  them  do;  since  we  rewrite  each 
proposal  for  the  board,  we  write  a   docket.      (Not  all  foundations 
do  that.       So,    obviously  the  board  doesn't  have  to  read  through   all 
that  material)  and  put  it  in  place   showing  why  it's  important  in 
the  whole  scheme  of  things,    which  a  prospective  grantee  couldn't 
possibly   say.    couldn't   know — 

Morris:        Couldn't  relate  to  the  other  proposals  being  considered. 

Sally  L:      Yes.       That's  right.      All  the  issues   of   the   whole  international 

global  peace   movement,  probably  not.      Some  could,  of  course.     The 
Arms  Control  Association  could,   but  the   Kansas   Freeze   couldn't. 
Anyway,    yes.       We    certainly    do   what  the   San   Francisco    Foundation 
did  in  those   times,    although  we   don't  ever  see  the   person  face  to 
face,    which   makes  it  easier,    and  ask  them    to  write  it  in  a  w  ay 
that — this  fact  is   possible   and   that  fact  is    possible,     because 
often  you're  turned  down  because  you  haven't,   in  certain 
foundations,    because  one  hasn't  put  in  a  fact   of   importance. 

Morris:        That  exists. 


69 


Sally  L  : 

Morris : 

Sally  L; 

Morris: 
Sally  L; 


Morris: 

Sally  L; 
Morris: 

Sally  L: 


Which  exists.      Or  if  it   doesn't  exist,    one   should  know   it.      But  in 
those    days,    I  think  I've   said  this  to  you  before,    the  San 
Francisco  Foundation  (I  know  I  did)  on  many  occasions  I  went  to 
them  with  groups,    usually  kids,   with  practically   illiterate  and — 

Let  them  tell   the  foundation  what   they  wanted  to   do? 

I  would  have  talked  to  them,   and  I'd  go  with  them   and  try  and 
explain  it  a  little  better.      Then  John  or  Lew    White  would  be 
helpful   in  what  kind  of,    usually  very   brief,    proposal  had  to  be 
written  to   get  into  that   docket. 

Do  I  have  this  right,   that  you  would  take  the  kids  and  go  to  the 
foundation  at   the  inquiry   stage? 

At  the  inquiry   stage.       Now,   in  this  women's  thing  we  did  write  a 
proposal  before  we  went  in  to  them.      The  inquiry  stage,  yes,  you 
could   do  it.      Maybe  that's  because--!  don't  know,    of  course  I  like 
to  feel  important,    but   I   think  it  is   also    conceivable  it  was 
because  I  know   Lew   and  John  very  well.      But  just  anybody  could 
have   done  it.      Probably   so. 

But  they  knew   that  you  were  likely  to  be  involved  in  something 
interesting? 

Yes,    I  was  a  friend. 

W  as  it  a   matter  of  saying,    "John  or  Lew,   you  people  really 
ought  to  take  a   look  at  what's  going  on  in  this  area"? 

Yes.       And  "Here  is  a   group.      This  is  really   a  new    idea.      This  is  a 
group  of  people  who   don't  know   exactly  how   to  put  it  together. 
Can  I  bring  them   in  to  talk  to  you.      They'll  answer  your 
questions. " 


70 


IX     AMNESTY  INTERNATIONAL.    1972-1979 


Fundraising  in  the  East 


Sally  L:     And  when — I  keep  thinking  you  must  tell  me  when  I'm  getting  off 
the  point  to  stop — when  I   started  the  board  for  Amnesty 
International   here,    a  western  board,    John  was  on  it. 

I'll   never  forget  John  warning  me  and   saying  "When  you   go 
east,    you're   going  to  find  a  very   great  difference   in  foundations. 
Don't   think   it's  like   the    San   Francisco   Foundation."     He'd   tell    me 
this  over  and  over  again.      And,   wow,   was  he  right.      Oh! 

Morris:        Really?     How   so? 

Sally  L:      My   experience   then  was  that  it  was  almost  impossible  to  get  in  to 
see   someone  in  a  foundation.      And  you  couldn't  make  an 
appointment   three  weeks   early.      They'd  be  much   too  busy.      That's 
not  true   in  Washington,    but  it's  true  in  New    York.      It's   not   true 
in  Boston,     it's   true   in  New   York.      I  think  it  is   still   true  now. 
My  experience  is  not   that  today,    because  now    Ploughshares  is  okay. 
Ploughshares  makes  a  number  of   grants  and  is  in  the  newspapers, 
[laughs]      So,    every  foundation  was   there,    by   the  way,    at  this 
overcrowded  reception.      I  wish  we  hadn't  asked  them;   they   came. 

Morris:        Really? 

Sally  L:     They  just   took  up  space.      But.    yes.    now   we  can  get  appointments. 
But  when  I  first  went  east  for  Ploughshares    (not   even  to  ask  for 
money,    though   I   guess   sometimes   I  was)  you'd  think  you  were 
getting  an  appointment  with  the   president.      And  it's   terrible, 
Gabriel le,    because   those   people — you're  not  talking  to  the 
president  of   the  board,    who  may   be  busy   doing  takeovers,    you're 
talking  to  someone  who's  paid. 

Morris:        And  was  it  because  Amnesty   did  not  have  the   status   that 
Ploughshares — 


71 


Sally  L:      Oh,    no.      Ploughshares   didn't  have  it  at  first;    this   is  just   now 
that  we   can  sometimes   do   it.      I   guess  what  I'm  saying  is   that 
small   or   unheard-of    or   barely-heard-of    organizations  have   a  hard 
time   getting  in  to   see   the  program   officer. 

Morris:        So  what  was   the   breakthrough  with  Amnesty? 

Sally  L:     Well,    I   didn't  do   that  much  about   that,   very   much  of    it,    although 
nobody    else   on   the   board  was  doing   any   of    it.      John   told  me  about 
somebody   at   the    Sherman   Foundation,    who   (the  man  who  ran  it)   had 
been  a  refugee  himself.       I    can't  recall   his   name.       I  was  able   to 
get   in  to   see   him,  but   most   people  were  not.      Now    that's  when 
Amnesty  was  very  new. 


Early   Interest;   European  Organiz ation 


Morris: 

Sally  L: 
Morris : 
Sally  L; 
Morris: 

Sally  L: 


That  was  what   I  was   thinking,    because  1961  was  what  I  came   across 
as   the   organizing  date. 


Morris : 
Sally  L; 


And 


I   got  involved  ten  years  later. 


Right. 

Or  eleven  years  later. 

What  was   there  about  Amnesty   that  appealed  to  you  as  a  place  to 
put  your  energy? 

Simply   reading  an  article   about   it,    and  being  so  lacking  in 
knowledge.      The  fact   that   there  were   people  in   prison  that  nobody 
had  heard  for  years,    the  fact   that   there  were  people  that  were 
tortured.       I   think  it's   something  that  you  put  out   of  your  mind   so 
that  you  don't  even  dwell,    think  about   it.      This  was  back  eighteen 
years  ago.      Of   course,    I   think   the  first   thing  that   ever   came 
across  my   thinking  of    it — I'm   sure  embarrassed  at  my  naivete — was, 
after  the  Second  World  War  there  was  an  art   contest,    a  major 
international   art  contest   conducted  in  London  for  a  sculpture  for 
the   unknown  political   prisoner.      I  only   mention  that   because   I 
think  it's  one   of   the  things   that  made   a  big  emotional   pang.      My 
God,    the   unknown  political   prisoner   still   not  found!      Oh,    what  an 
awful    thing. 

Where  is   that   statue? 

It's  in  London,   but  I  can't  tell  you  where.      I  can't  even  tell  you 
the  name  of  it.     I  can  see  it  in  my  eye,   but  I   can't  tell  you  the 
name   of   the  artist.      I   guess   I  was — 


72 


Morris:  You  were   still   sculpting  at   that   point,   weren't  you? 

Sally  L:  Yes.      I   guess  that's  why    I  was  interested — 

Morris:  Did  you — 

Sally  L:  I   suppose   so.      Oh,    no.      No,    these   are  major  artists. 

Morris:  I   know  you  were   concerned  about  refugees   during  World  War   II. 

Sally  L:  Yes.      Always. 

Morris:  I  wondered  if   there  was  a  logical   extension. 

Sally  L:  I   think  everything  is,    it's  just   that  you  don't' think  about  it. 

Morris:  I  came  across  a  couple  of  interesting  articles  about  Amnesty.  One 
of  them  said  that  there's  less  of  an  organization  in  the  U.S.  than 
in  other  parts  of  the  world. 

Sally  L:  In  Amnesty   International? 

Morris:  Right. 

Sally  L:  Bet   I   can  tell  you  the  reason. 

Morris:  Okay.      That1 s  why   I'm  asking. 

Sally  L:     Yes,    there's   a  lot  of   reasons.      First  of   all,    I   should  say   that 

Amnesty   is,   and  particularly  was,    the   size  organization —      It  has 
never  been  able   to  process  the  political   prisoner,   enough   of   them 
to   satisfy   the   consumer,   which  is  a  terrible   thing  to   say.      The 
membership  can't  grow   until — the  membership  grows  as  far  as  giving 
money,    but   the  actual    groups,    which  is   the  adoption   groups,    can't 
grow    until   they   have  prisoners.      And  the  prisoners   can  not  be 
allocated  until   they   go   through  a   tremendous  amount  of   research, 
before    they're   adopted  as   prisoners.      They    can't   be    criminals,    all 
kinds   of   things. 

That   institution  isn't   really   big  enough   to  actually   do   the 
research   that  it — in  other  words,    there   could  be  many   more   groups 
than  there   is   ability   to  do   the  research,    although   it's  being  done 
all    the   time.      Any   country — I'm   really   talking  about   something 
that   I   shouldn't   talk  about,    because   it's   something  like   nine 
years,    ten — 

Morris:        I'm  interested  in  what  it  was  like   in  the  1970s. 

Sally  L:  In  those  years  it  was,  particularly  as  a  group,  there  was  no  way 
that  the  London  office  could  do  the  research  on  enough  prisoners 
to  satisfy  the  number  of  groups  that  wanted  to  be  formed  to  work. 


73 


Morris:        To  lobby? 

Sally  L:      It's  more  than  that — to  work,   in  their  very   focused  way   on  getting 
those   prisoners  out  of   prison,    or  keeping  them  from   dying.      And 
the  major  place,    when  I  was  there,    is  Germany.      And  that's 
understandable,    isn't  it?      West  Germany.      Of   course,    these  were 
the — 

Morris:        This  is  people  in  West  Germany,    who  wanted  to  work  for  release  of 
political  prisoners  in  other   countries? 

Sally  L:     That's  the  rule.      In  Amnesty,    you  could  only  work  with  prisoners 
in  countries  other   than  your  own,   because  it  would  be   dangerous, 
particularly   then.      It  was   dangerous   to  work  for  political 
prisoners  in  your  own   country.      In  Spain,    Greece,    and  in  Russia 
they   were  also  thrown  in  jail.     Actually,   Amnesty   International 
chapters  in  Eastern   European  countries  had  been  in  prison. 

Morris:        For   trying  to — ? 

Sally  L:     Work  with  prisoners  in  other  countries.      So,    I  was  very 

disappointed  when  the  American  section  took  up   capital   punishment 
in  this   country.      In  fact,    that  was  one  of   the  reasons   I  resigned. 
Because  to  me,    it  loses  its  strength  if  you  work  within  your 
country.      I  don't  think  we  need  to  be  telling  the  rest  of   the 
world  that  they   can't  work  in  their   own  country,   and  doing  it 
ourselves.      At  any   rate,    that's  a  very   small  point. 

You  said  you  read  that  America  was   slow   to  start.      But  the 
guilt  of  Western  Europeans  was   such  that — I  shouldn't  say   that,    I 
hate  to  blame  things  on   guilt,    but   sensitivity   to  these  matters 
was   such   that  you  could  have,    I'm  told,    every  other  person  would 
belong  to  Amnesty  International.      When  I  was   there    (I   do  not  know 
that  this  is  true   any   longer  at  all.    and  I   don't  know   how   long 
this  law  existed)  a  traffic  ticket  in  West  Germany  for  a  number  of 
years,    I  don't  know    for  how   long,    you  could  either  pay   off  to  the 
traffic  court  or  you  could   give  the  money   to  Amnesty 
International . 

Morris:        As   a  matter  of   public  policy. 

Sally  L:     Yes.      And  now    Scandinavia,    I  think  in  both  Norway  and  Sweden,    and 
I'm   not  sure  about  Denmark — those   places  were  very,  very  active  in 
Amnesty   International.      They   have  a  long  traditional,    after  all, 
of  helping  refugees  and  the  politically  oppressed.      The   government 
gives  a  large   amount  of   money   to  Amnesty   International.      It's 
almost  a   government  institution  in  Scandinavia. 

And  their  involvement  is   so  powerful.      Now    in  England,    it's 
always  been  extremely  strong.      When  I  was  in  England     and  met  many 
of   these  people,    they   were  elderly  pensioners  or  elderly  academics 


74 


Sally  L:      mostly.      Sort  of   fuddy-dud  English   pensioners — that's    changed   a 
lot,    but   it  was  a  very,   very   active  group  in  England,    and  very 
large. 


San  Francisco  Adoption  Group:      Freeing  Fernando  Flores 


Morris:       Did  you  become  part  of  an  adoption  group? 

Sally  L:      Oh.   yes,    I  was   the  head  of  an  adoption   group,   here  in  San 
Francisco. 

Morris:        Did  you  have  any   say   as  to  who  was  assigned  to  your   group? 

Sally  L:     No.     No,   except  that  I  was  in  an  executive   committee  on  Amnesty 

International   and  very,   very   much   involved.      I  worked  there  full- 
time.     We  were   given  a  very  interesting  prisoner.    I'll  just  put  it 
that  way.      I  think  maybe   that's  why.      An  extraordinarily 
interesting  person. 

Morris:        It  is  appropriate  to  say  what  country — ? 

Sally  L:      Oh,    yes.      I'm  very   proud  of   it.      This  Amnesty   group   got   Fernando 
Flores  out   of  jail.      He  was  a  minister  in  the  Allende  government 
who  had   two  posts.     We   did  everything,    everything  you  could 
imagine   to  get  him  out   of   prison.      And  he  is  a  cyberneticist,    an 
internationally  known  cyberneticist,   who  among  other  things,    and   I 
don't  understand  how   one  does  this  at  all,    put  the  economy,    or  had 
a  plan  for  putting  the  economy   of   Chile — of   computerizing  the 
economy   of   Chile.      He  is  actually  an  international   figure  in  this 
field.     He  was  put  away   in  a  prison  on  an  islandl      Highly  educated 
man,   and  had  been  in  many    international   conferences.     Tremendously 
well-thought  of.      I   think  he'd  been  hired   to   cyberneticize   the 
economy   of  other  countries,    the  Netherlands — [laughs] — I  don't 
know.      So,  you  could  get  letters  to  get  this  man  out  of  prison 
from    the  entire  faculty   of  Harvard,    and  all  kinds  of   people.      We 
couldn't  move  it. 

We   did  everything  that  you  could  possibly  think  of.      We  hired 
someone  to  work  on  senators.      We   got  Alan  Cranston  to   go  over  to 
the  Chilean  embassy,    and  we  got  this  one  and  that  one  to — I 
forget — I  think  Proxmire.      I  forget  how   many   senators  and 
congressmen.      That's  the  sort  of   thing  that  we  did. 

One  of  the  things  we  did  which  is  an  interesting  idea,    is  we 
called — you  can  make   a  long-distance   call,    person-to-person,    and 
if  you   don't  arrive  at   the   person,    of    course,    you   don't  have   to 
pay   for   the  cost.      So  every   day.    we  would  call   President 
Pinochet's   office,    and  we  would   get  his   secretary,    because  the 


75 


Sally  L : 


call   came  from  California.      Every  day,   we  would  say.   we  would  like 
to   speak   to  President  Pinochet,    in  English,    of   course;   we  didn't 
speak  in  Spanish.      She   spoke  English. 

And  "Why   do  you  want  to  speak  to  President  Pinochet?"  like 
any   good  secretary.      "Because  we  want  to  talk  to  him  about 
Fernando  Flores." 

And   she   said,    "I'm   sorry,    the  president   is   in  a  meeting." 

[laughs] 

And  we  did  this  every   day,    every   day,    every   day.      And 
finally  one  of  our  members   to  our  horror  got  the   president  on  the 
phone.       [laughs]      Well,    I  don't  think  that's  what  got  him  out,    but 
it  was  a  miracle  and  we  did  get  him  out.      He's  now  made  a  million 
dollars   or  more  in  San  Francisco. 

He   came  to  San  Francisco? 

He   came   to  San  Francisco  and  we  helped  him  a  lot,    because  he  had  a 
whole  family.     And  we  didn't  stop  there.     We  got  him  food,   we 
helped  get  him  a  place   to  live.      Phil   helped  him  to  get  taken  on 
at   Cal.      We   didn't   stop  at  bringing  him  here. 

That  must  have  been  tremendously  satisfying. 

This  is  the  most  extraordinary  thing,   to  work  for  Amnesty  and  get  a 
prisoner  out.      Imagine  1 

In  the  matter  of   the  Allende  government, was  the  question  of 
possible  American  influence   on  overthrowing  that   government — 

I   like   the  way  you  put   it.      Of   course,    we  gossiped  about   it,    just 
like  we're  gossiping  now   on  who  is  really  making  up  their  minds  on 
the  INF  Treaty   and  what  is  the  payoff   to  Richard  Perle,    but  we  had 
information;   that's  just  our  gossip. 

Morris:       At  that  time  was  it  discussed  at  all? 

Sally  L:     No,    just  as   I'm   telling  you,    as   gossip  I  think  in  Amnesty,   you 

just  try   to  keep  your  mind  on  your  business  and  get  that  prisoner 
out.      I  will  tell  you,  though,    it  takes  a  kind  of  patience  that  is 
Job-like.      I  am  no  one  to  talk,    because   I  was  only   there —     I  ran 
a   group,   maybe   three  or  four   groups,    for  only   three  years  maybe, 
and  then  someone  took  it  over,    because  when  I  became  vice  chairman 
I   didn't  have   time  because   I  had  to   go  east  once  a  month,    and  do 
the  accompanying  work,    and  help  run  the  office  here. 

How  many  years  ago — let  me   say   it's  eleven  years  ago,    I  was 
interested   in  a  prisoner  we  had,   a  poet   in  Korea.      I   should 
remember  his  name,    but  I   don't.      We  worked  on  that   prisoner.      We 


Morris : 
Sally  L: 

Morris: 
Sally  L: 

Morris: 
Sally  L: 


76 


Sally  L:     wrote  letters.      Every  opportunity  we  had,    we   sent   something.      You 
never  know   whether  it   gets  there.      You  never  get  a   reply.      You 
never  know  whether   the   person's   alive.      The  family    can't    get   back 
to  you.      You  write  to  the  family.      You  send  things   to   the  family. 
You  do  all   these   things,    never  to  hear  a  word,    and  often  you  don't 
know   whether   the   person's  alive.      You  can  go  on  for  fifteen, 
twenty,    thirty  years.      Well,    in  this   case,    the  reason  I   bring  it 
up  is.   of   all   things   I  read  in  the  paper  about   three   months  ago 
that   this  man  was  let  free.     And  I'm  not  sure  it  was   through 
Amnesty   at  all.      He  had  been  a  principal  journalist  and  poet,    and 
he  had  written  against  the  government.      It  is  amazing  how    people 
work  for   this. 

Morris:        In  getting  something  going  in  northern  California,    did  you  start 
with  the  adoption  groups,    or  did  you  start  with  the  information 
and  membership? 

Sally  L:      I   think  information  and  membership.      Early  on  there  were  a  couple 
of   groups.      One   of   them — extraordinary   group  was  run  by  Kay  Boyle 

41 

H 

Sally  L:     I  really  don't  know   how   she  became  involved,   because  it  was  a 
separate   group.      I   don't  know.      It  really   takes   devotion,    a 
tremendous  amount  of   devotion,    to  do  these  things,    to  do  them 
right.     You  can  imagine  when  you  don't  hear  from   them,   when 
there's   no   sign   of   anybody.      I've  heard  stories    (and   I   only   hear  a 
few)   of   people  working  on — imagine  a  prisoner  in  South  Africa. 
Never  hear  from   him.      You  could  be   sending  that  letter  once  a  week 
or  once  a  month  and   clothes  and  food  and  whatever,   and  never  ever, 
ever  hear  from   that  person. 

Morris:        When  Senor        Flores  was   released  and  came  to  San  Francisco,    did  you 
talk  with  him  at  all? 

Sally  L:     Oh,  yes. 

Morris:        As  to  how   much,  if  any,  of   the  things  you'd  sent  he  received? 

Sally  L:      I  don't  remember  that  we   sent  him  anything.      I   think  it  was 

inappropriate  for  some  reason,    I  forget,    to  send  him  actually   food 
or— I   think  we   couldn't   get  in.      His   family   received  it   though. 
We   sent  it   to  help  his  family.      Now   he  came  from,    actually  his 
wife  came  from  a  wealthy  family.     But  we  sent  her  food  for  her 
small   children. 

Morris:       Was  he   aware  while  he  was   in  prison — 

Sally  L:     Oh.    yes. 

Morris:   — that  you  were  working  on  his  release? 


77 


Sally  L : 


Morris: 
Sally  L; 


Morris: 
Sally  L 


He  was,    I  think,    once   somehow.      There  are  all  kinds  of  leaks  in 
these  prisons,    somehow    a  letter  or  word  or  something  gets  through. 
I'm  sure  you've  read  those  things  about  Amnesty.      They   are  heart 
rending.      Imagine  being  in  prison.      Imagine  being  in  solitary 
confinement,    or  in  prison,    for  years  and  years  and  years,    not 
knowing  that  anybody  knows  that  you're  alive.      And  then  getting  a 
word  that  somebody   in  a   country   that  you  don't  even  know   is 
working  for  you  and  cares  about  you.      It's  pretty  powerful   stuff, 
I'll   tell  you 

Has  there  been  any   thought  of   expanding  the  research  side   of 
Amnesty,    so   that  more — ? 

It's   expanded  enormously.      You  know,    I   can't   answer   anything, 
Gabrielle,    about  what  they're   doing  today  about  it.      But   there  is 
a  very,    very  powerful,    thoughtful,    hardworking  international 
committee  constantly  working  to  improve  and  expand  Amnesty's 
services. 

Research  was,   while  you  were  active,    it  was  all  done  in  England? 

It  was  always   done  in  England.      While  I  was  there,   we   grew   in  the 
United  States  from   a  one-person  office  to  what  was  probably  by 
the  time   I  left,   about  a  13-person   staff   in  offices  across  the 
country,    and  now   there  are  many,   many   more  who  are  paid  personnel. 


Urgent  Action  Network 


Sally 


Morris: 
Sally  L ; 
Morris: 
Sally  L: 


And  one   of   the  things   is  that  there  was  an  enormous — what  do  you 
call  it — a  network  that  can  immediately   contact,    through  its 
computers,  all  kinds  of   people  all   over  the  United  States  to  work 
on  behalf   of  a  prisoner — Urgent  Action  it's    called.      That  was 
developed  in  San  Francisco,    actually,    by  somebody  who  was  here  in 
our  office,    first  of   all  as   a  volunteer,    and  then  an  extraordinary 
staff  person.     And  he  runs  it  from   a  mountain  in  Colorado   today 
with  his  family. 

Do  you  remember  his  name? 
Yes.    I   do.      Scott  Harrison. 


Now   how   did  that  idea  develop? 

I  just  can't  remember  how  those  things  evolved, 
extraordinarily  useful — for  instance,  let's  say 
prisoner's  a  doctor.  A  prisoner  is  often  a  professional  person. 
Think  how  many  places  in  the  world  with  an  oppressive  government 
political  prisoners  are  professionals  because  so  often  activists 


It's 
that   the 


78 


Sally  L:      are   intellectuals.     All    the   doctors   on   the  Urgent   Action 

network  are  alerted  to  write  their  medical  associations  in 
Yugoslavia,    Czechoslovakia,    Chile,    whatever — 

Morris:       American  doctors  writing  to — 

Sally  L:     Writing  to   their   counterparts   there,   for  instance.      That  would  be 
an  example.     Or  writing  to  members  of   the  government.     But,   of 
course,    then  there's  an  Urgent  Action  where  everybody  ought   to 
write — to  keep  somebody   from  being  killed,    or  somebody  who's  being 
horribly   tortured.     And  that  information  comes  instantaneously 
through   the  computers  Scott  mans  on  that  mountaintop  in  Colorado. 
It   comes  by  telex  from  London. 

Morris:        And  the  Urgent  Action  is  normally   addressed  to  a  government? 
Sally  L:      It  is  normally  addressed  to  a  government,    right. 

Morris:        I   gather  there  have  been  cases  when  governments  on  the  receiving 
end  of  Urgent  Action  appeal   to  the  sending  country  saying, 
"Stop  the  letters." 

Sally  L:     Yes;   oh.   yes.     The  one  thing  about  government  officials  everywhere 
is  that  apparently  they  don't  want  to  be  embarrassed  by  the  rest 
of   the  world  knowing  that  they're  beasts.     No  matter  how   they 
behave,    they  apparently  don't  want  to  be  so  recognized.      Not   that 
torture,    imprisonment  or  murder  has  stopped. 

Morris:        I  wonder  if  there  is  any  sense  that  the  numbers  of   people  who  are 
tortured  are  fewer  today  than  they  were  fifteen  years  ago?      It 
seems  as  if  when  things   alleviate  in  one  area  that  it  pops   up  in 
another. 

Sally  L:     I  think  it  alleviates  it  for  individuals  that  can  be  identified, 
but   certainly  not  for  numbers   of   people.      Interesting  places 
Amnesty   International   has  been  able  to  go.     Originally,    how   could 
they   do  any  research  in  China?     But  they  do  today. 

Morris:        Has  any   research  been  done   in  the  United  States? 

Sally  L:      Oh,   yes. 

Morris:        Have  there  been  cases — ? 

Sally  L:     Oh,    yes,    of   course.      Some  American  Indians  who  are  in  prison  have 
Amnesty   groups  working  for   their  release.      Anybody  who's   in  prison 
for  a  political    reason — and  Amnesty   makes  that  decision.      Now 
there  are  not  very  many   political   prisoners   in   the  U. S.,    and   they 
are  not  mistreated  after  all — in  a  physical   sense,    that  is. 


79 


Nobel   Peace  Prize,   1977 


Morris:  Were  you  involved  when  the  Nobel   Prize  was  awarded? 

Sally  L:  Yes. 

Morris:  Twice   in  three  years  is   unprecedented,    isn't  it?      1974 — 

Sally  L :  No,    there  was  only  one. 

Morris:  No,    there  were  two. 

Sally  L:  Not  for  Amnesty   International. 

Morris:        Yes.      1974  and   1977.     Once  was  to  the  Irish  foreign  minister,    who 
was   then  chairman  of  Amnesty. 

Sally  L:     Sean  McBride. 
Morris :        Right.      And — 

Sally  L:     Well,    that's  right.      Sean  McBride  was,    but  he  was  down  for  a  lot 
of  other  things  too.      I'd  forgotten  that  he  got — 

Morris:        Then  in  1977,   Martin  Ennals,   who  was  also  secretary   of  Amnesty. 

Sally  L:     Well,    Sean  McBride,    I'd  forgotten,    got  it  for  a  lot  of   things,    I 
think.      But  Amnesty   International   itself  got  it  in  1977.      Martin 
Ennals  was   the  head  of  it,   but  Amnesty   International   got  it.      And 
let  me  tell  you  how   they   received  the  news  of   the  award. 

One   of   their  staff  members  was  in  Sweden.      I'd  like  to   say  he 
was   calling  on  his   girlfriend.      I  think  it  was  true,    but   I'm  not 
quite  sure.      Anyway,   he  was  in  Sweden,    and  he  found  out  that 
Amnesty   was   going  to  get  the  award.      And  he  found  out  maybe  five 
minutes  before  it  was  announced.      So  he  phoned  the   office  in 
London.      He  got  Martin  on  the  phone,    and  he  said,    "You  won  the 
Nobel   Peace  Prize." 

And  Martin  said,   "Really?      I   must  tell   the  people  around 
here."     In  those   days  they  worked  in  an  old  house.      I  have  not 
been  to  their  new   offices,    but  you  just  couldn't  believe  the 
original   one.      It  was  one   of   those   centuries-old  English  buildings 
where  you  can't   ever  find  the  staircase   or  the  offices.      Each 
little  room  is   directly  off   the  narrow   stairs — that's   the  kind  of 
a  place.      So  Martin  got  the  word  around — came  into  the  office  and 
said,    "Did  you  know   it  was  just  announced  over   the  television  that 
we  won  the  Nobel  Peace  Prize?"     And  immediately  everybody  was  back 
working  without  a  break.      It's  so   typical.      It  is   so  typical. 


80 


Morris:        Well,    somebody  has  to  submit  to  the  Nobel   committee — 

Sally  L:     Oh,    yes.      I   don't  know   how    it's   chosen,    but  all  kinds  of   crazy 

people  are  submitted,    I'll   tell  you.      I   only   know   because,    of    all 
things.    I  have  been  submitted.      The  only   reason  I  know    is  because 
a  couple  of  people  have  written  me  letters:      "We  have  submitted 
you  and  Mr.    Gorbachev   this  year."     Ridiculous  1      So  it  must  be   some 
important   group   that  suggests   them,    I  know,    because  it   can't  be 
j  ust — 

Morris:       You  and  me  deciding — 

Sally  L:     Me  deciding,    no!     No,    no  i't  can't. 

Morris:        There's  quite  a  sizable  financial   award  that  goes  with  it.      What 
did  Amnesty  use  the  money   for? 

Sally  L:      I  have  no  idea.      Put  it  right  back  into  administration,    I'm  sure. 
Morris:       Who  goes  to  Stockholm? 

Sally  L:     Martin  Ennals,    I  guess,    went.      And  the  chairman  of   the  board,    but 
I  don't  remember  who  the  chairman  of  the  board  was  then.      I've 
totally  forgotten. 

Morris:        The   chairman  was  Thomas  Hammarberg. 

Sally  L:     That's  right.      Oh  goodness,    your  research  is  wonderful.      Who  comes 
from  Sweden. 

Morris:       Right.      He  later  became  secretary   general. 

Sally  L:     That's  what  I  call   the  executive  director.      Yes,    the   secretary 
general. 

Morris:       Right.      But  the  chairman — 

Sally  L:      Martin  Ennals  was  the  secretary  general.      Tom  Hammarberg  was  the 
chairman  and  then  he  became  the  secretary   general,    and  somebody 
else  became  the — 

Morris:        Is  that  usually  for  the  chairman  of  the  board  to  become  the  staff 
administrator? 

Sally  L:     No.    I   don't   think   so,    no.      It's   an   interesting  arrangement.      Well, 
he  was  a  newspaperman.      He  was  a  journalist.      He  was  working  at 
his  profession  while  doing  a   full-time  volunteer  job  for 
Amnesty. 


81 


Adding  Public  Relations   Staff 


Morris:        As  a  jounalist,  was  he   useful   in  developing  the  visibility  of 
Amnesty? 

Sally  L:      I  don't  think  so  particularly.      I  know   very   little,    really  almost 
nothing,  about   the  workings  of  our  international   office.      I   could 
tell  you  what  happened  on  Sacramento  Street.      I'm  afraid  that's  my 
role  in  life:      I   don't  know  what  happens  in  the  big  city.      But  I 
do  remember  very  well  when  we  hired  in  New  York  a  public  relations 
person,   and  what  a  lot  of  difference  that  made. 

Morris:        Did  it  really? 

Sally  L:     Oh,    yes.      It   reminds   me,    although   it's   a  little   different — it's 
such  a  completely  different  thing  and  its   dynamic  is   different 
totally — of  what  Ploughshares  is  today   (what  Amnesty  International 
in  this   country  was  when  it  was  five  years  old.)      Can  you  imagine 
our  having  a  public  relations  person?     And  Amnesty   International, 
in  those   days,   didn't  make  any  more  money   than  we   do  here,    than 
Ploughshares  does. 

Morris:        So,  was  the  PR  person  hired  before  a  director? 
Sally  L:     No.      By   that   time  there  was  a  large   staff. 


Starting  a  Northern  California  Group;   Cloak  and  Dagger  Adventure 


Morris: 


Sally  L; 


Morris : 
Sally  L; 
Morris : 


Which  did  you  start  with? 
they — 


The  Northern  California  group,    and  then 


Well,    we  started  with  the  Northern  California  group  and  then  this 
wonderful  woman,   Ginetta  Sagan.   who  really  is  the  person  who 
started  it  in  Northern  California  and  who  I  worked  with  and  who 
was   the  one  who  sucked  me  in  very  hard.      She's  irresistible,    or 
was  in  those  days  particularly.      She  herself  was  a  political 
prisoner  at  eighteen.      She  was   Italian,    wealthy  background,    who 
worked  with  the  underground  in  the  Second  World  War,    was  in 
prison,    tortured,   freed  in  a  hay  wagon  or  laundry  wagon — I  forget 
which.      And  she  has   spent  her  life  on  human  rights. 

Was   she  then  living  in  San  Francisco? 

She  lives  in  Palo  Alto.      She  does   today  with  her  doctor— husband. 

Had  she  been  and  her  husband  been  active  in  Amnesty   elsewhere?      Or 
had  they   started  when  they   came  to  the  Bay  Area? 


82 


Sally  L:      No.    she  had  always   been  involved.      She   got  married  to  him  very, 
very  young.      She  was   sent  over  to  this   country   from   Paris.      Her 
parents  were  murdered.      Anyway,    she  became  involved  in  human 
rights,    and  kept — or  political   prisoners — and  she  kept  very,    very 
close  ties  with  all   of  her   underground  acquaintances   all   over 
Europe.      She  worked  on  an  international  basis.      By  the  time   I  knew 
her,    she  had  been  working  with  Amnesty  and  with  other  human-rights 
groups  there — just  as  an  individual,  working  on  human  rights  for 
years.      But   she  wasn't  on  the  board.      She  had   done  absolutely 
extraordinary  work — but  they'd  never  heard  of   the  West  Coast  in 
New  York  where  the  tiny  U. S.    office  was. 

Morris:  That's  the  story  I'm  interested  in — the  Amnesty  organization 
didn't  think  of  the  United  States  as  being  a  place  for  their 
activities? 

Sally  L:     I  don't  think  so.      It  didn't  think  that  way,  no.     It  didn't.     I 
don't  remember.    I  really  don't  recall  where  there  were   chapters, 
except  that  the  biggest  one  of   all   is  on  Riverside  Drive,    in  New 
York  City.      I   think  there  were  others  in  New   York  and  there 
probably  was  one  in  Connecticut,  and     I  don't  know  where  else.      I 
just  don't  know  how  many  there  were.     But,   because  we  lived  out 
here,  we  decided  there  should  be  some  Amnesty  work  out  here. 

The  first  thing  we  did  together  was,   in  retrospect, 
absolutely   insane.      Ginetta  talked  me  in — I  cannot  imagine  how   I 
could  have  done  such  a   thing — to   going  to  Greece  with  her —     This 
is  Greece   under  the  colonels;  you  can  remember  torture  and  murder 
and  awful  things  that  were  done — to  try  and  free  some  prisoners 
and  drive  them   out   of   the  country   at  night,    out   of  Athens  at  night 
to  a  safe  place.      Now   I   can't   even  drive  at  night,    Gabrielle. 
And  of  course,    I  can't  speak  Greek,    but  she  needed  someone  to  go 
with  her.      She  had  been  there  a  number  of   times. 

Her  contacts,    all   over  in  this  netherworld  of   good  people. 
who  were  trying  to  help  so-called  prisoners   of   conscience  was 
enormous.      And  it  was  enormous  in  Vietnam,    in  which  I  got  very 
involved,    to  try  to  get  people  out  of   tiger   cages.      All   right. 
And   then  later,    we,    in  fact,    had  an  underground  railroad,    I  don't 
even  think  I   should   say   this.      Well,    of   course,    it   still   exists,    I 
imagine,    out   of   Chile.        We  had  a  lot  to  do  with  that. 

Anyway,    these  were   all  like   cheap   thrillers.     How   could  I 
have  gone?      To   this  day   I   can  not  imagine.      I   had  sleepless 
nights.      I  was   scared,    absolutely   to  death,    I  was   scared  to   death. 

Morris:        Can  we  go  back  to  Greece   for  a  minute? 

Sally  L:      Yes.    that's  what   I  mean.      I  was   scared  to   death  about   going  to 
Greece. 


Morris : 


Sally  L : 


83 


Were  these  people  you  were  going  to  drive  out  by  night 
going  to  go   in  and  personally  spring  the  lock? 


-were  you 


No,    the  lock  was   going  to  be  sprung,   and  they  were   going  to  be 
brought   to  some  place.     And  they  were  going  to  go  in  our  cars 
as  we  were   going  to  zoom  through  the  night,    two  separate  night 


Morris:       Waving  your  American  passport. 

Sally  L:     Waving  your  American  passports  or  something.      It  was  never  made 
clear  to  me. 


Morris :        It   does  indeed  sound  like — 

Sally  L:     The  craziest  thing  you  ever  heard  in  your  life.      Fortunately,    we 
never  got  to  Greece  or  I  surely  would  not  be  here  to  tell  you  the 
story. 

I  have  a  feeling  that  somehow    it  wasn't  quite  as  sewn  up  as 
she  thought,    although   she  had  been  to  Greece  quite  often.      We   got 
to  London  first.      She  had  never  visited  the  Amnesty   International 
offices.      There  we  met  the  man  who  won  the  Nobel   Peace  Prize. 

Morris          Sean  McBride? 

Sally  L:      Sean  McBride.      And  Sean  McBride  told  us  about  two  Frenchmen  who 

had  been  put  in  tiger   cages,    because  they  had  put  banners   all   over 
Saigon  talking  about  how    great  the  Viet  Cong  really  were.    etc.      I 
won't  elaborate,    but  you  get   the   picture.      After  some  years,    the 
French  communists  and  also  the  French  government  itself  had  been 
able  to  get  these  people  out.     By  the  time  Ginetta  and  I  arrived 
in  London  the  two  young  men  had  come  back  to  Europe,    and  were 
living  in  France.      And  wouldn't  it  be  wonderful  for  political 
prisoners  in  those  tiger  cages,    if  one  could  introduce   to 
Americans  former  prisoners  who  had  actually  been  there.      Well, 
said  I.   we  will   tour  them  around  the  United  States. 

Morris:        The  people  who  had  gotten  out? 

Sally  L:     These   two  Frenchmen,   who  are  now   in  France,   who  will  tell  their 
story  of  what's  happening  in  the   tiger   cages.      That's   the   time 
when  I  put   some  money   down  to  get  them   to  the  United  States.      I'll 
try  and  be  brief,    but  these  stories  are   all   so — [laughs] — I   don't 
know.      And  we   did.      We  did,    we  did.      They   came.      And  Ginetta 
toured  them  around  this   country.      She  is   tri-lingual,  having  spent 
her  young  adulthood  in  France.      Her  godfather  in  France   took  her 
in  after  she  was  freed  from   prison.      And  so   she  was  brought  up  and 
went   to  college  in  France   mostly.      She  is  absolutely   irresistable. 
this  woman.      Yay  high,   very  round,    rosy   cheeks,    passionate 
speaker,    I  mean  she  makes. Helen  Caldicott  look  like  nothing. 


84 


Sally  L:      Anyway,    she  toured  them  around   the  United  States.      I  vent  ahead   of 

her  and  tried  to  set  up  some  public  meetings.      Ginetta  jetted  me  back 
ahead  of  her. 


Morris         You  did  advance  work  for  their  tour? 

Sally  L:      A  little  bit.    in  a  few   places,    like   Minneapolis. 
doing? 


Oh.    what  was   I 


Morris:       Was  it  contacts  with  Amnesty  people  there? 

Sally  L:     No,    because   there  weren't  Amnesty   people.      That  was   the   point.      At 
that  point.    Amnesty   was  just  one  office  of  one  person  in  New  York 
and  a   couple   of   groups.      This  is   the  way   that  it   spread  —  I  was 
really  telling  you  this  long  intricate  story  because   this  is  one 
of  the  ways  Amnesty  International   began  to  spread  in  the  United 
States,    when  you  see  some  people  that  have  been  through  —  even 
though  they   don't   speak  English.      I   think  one   of   them   did,  a  little 
bit. 

Because   of   those  French  former  prisoners,    we  didn't  go   to 
Greece.     We  went  to  Paris  to  meet  them.     Ginetta  had  loads  of 
French  friends,   and  I  sat  alone  in  the  hotel   in  Paris  waiting  for 
what  my  orders  were  to  be.      And  the  Greek  people,    in  the  meantime, 
were  freed  by  somebody  else,    and  they  arrived  at  three  o'clock  in 
the  morning  at   somebody's  apartment  in  Paris.      This  is   the   story 
of   Ginetta'  s   life,    though.      It  just  goes  on  and  on  and  on,    year 
after  year  after  year  in  this   dramatically  humanitarian  fashion. 
This  was  my   only  adventure  of   this   sort,  fortunately. 

Morris  :       So  you  brought  the  Greek  — 

Sally  L:      I  went  ahead  of   her  to  come  home  and  arranged  the  meetings  in  a 

few   places.      Then  the  French  prisoners   came,    and  she  toured  around 
the  United  States,    I  think  mostly  college  campuses,    or  human 
rights   groups,    but  not  Amnesty   groups  —  peace  and  justice   groups. 
or  friends  of  friends  — 

Morris:        How  about  United  Nations   groups? 

Sally  L:      I   don't  think  we  thought  of   it  at  the  time.      Although   the  United 
Nations   became  very   involved  with  Amnesty,   but   I   don't   think  — 
This  was  just  a  little  project   of  Ginetta1  s  and  mine,    you 
understand. 

Morris:        Right.      Well,    between  the  two  of  you,    it   sounds  like  you  had  a 
good  international  — 

Sally  L:     Well,    she  really.      She  knew   what  she  was   doing.      I  just  followed 

along.      Anyway,    she   did   that  and  it   got   a  lot  of   people  interested 
in  Amnesty   International.      Lots  of    them. 


85 


Morris ; 


Sally  L: 


Morris: 
Sally  L: 
Morris: 
Sally  L: 
Morris: 
Sally  L: 
Morris: 
Sally  L: 

Morris: 
Sally  L: 
Morris: 
Sally  L: 
Morris: 
Sally  L: 


Even  though  none  of  you  at  that  point  were  active  in  Amnesty 
International? 

Well,    we  were  members  of  Amnesty.     We  were  in  touch  with  the  woman 
who  was  the  person  in  the  office,   who  we  were  not  very  happy  with. 
And  we  were  very  much  in  touch  with  the  chairman,   who  was  not  used 
to  this  kind  of  activity.      [laughs]      Who  was  a  very-known  professor 
from   Columbia,    Ivan  Morris,    a  renowned  specialist  in  Japanese 
sociology. 

Was  anybody  encouraging  this  touring  around  the  United  States? 

Oh,    I   don't   think  so. 

This  was  a  good  way   to  get  some  Amnesty   groups  organized? 

Oh.    I   don't  think  so. 

That's   fascinating. 

I  never  thought  of   that.   Gabrielle.      [laughs] 

But   obviously,    you — 

I'm    sure  they   encouraged   it.      I'm   sure  they   said,    "Fine,    if 
you  can   get  some  members."     I   don't  remember  any   connections 
with  anybody.      I  don't  remember  any   formal  connections  with 
anybody. 

Did  Professor  Morris  say,    "Sally,    I  want  you  to  organize — 
I   didn't  even  know  him  at  that   time. 
— the  Northern  California  committee? 
Oh,   no.      [laughs]      No. 
It  j  ust  grew — 

I  think  they   decided  to  start  a  California  committee.     By 
that  time,    and  I  don't  remember  what  happened  in  between  times, 
there  were  some  groups  that  had  started  here.     And  Ginetta 
herself  had  a  very  active   group  in  Palo  Alto.      Then  I   started  a 
a  group.      By  that  time  we  hired  somebody   for  the  San  Francisco 
office. 

Somewhere  along  the  line,    Ginetta  and  I  went  east  and  we 
said,    "There's   got  to  be  a  western   office.      We've   got   these    groups 
out  there.      There  are  all   these  active  people  to  raise   some  money 
for  you  right  out  here.  " 


86 


Sally  L:      And   they   said.     "Oh.    what  are  you  thinking  about?"      And    Roger 

Baldwin — the   man  that  started  the  ACLU — who  was  about  90  years 
old,   and  on  the  board — I'll  never  forget.      He   said,    "I   don't  want 
to  hear  anything  about  it." 

i 

Morris:       He  was  on  the  Amnesty — 

Sally  L:     The  Amnesty  International  board.      "I  want  to  hear  nothing  from  the 
West."      [laughs]      He  was  absolutely  scathing  about  the  fact  that 
these    two   women  would  have   the   audacity   to   suggest — [laughs].       Oh. 
dear.       He  later   changed  his   mind,    because   everybody    who   ever  met 
Ginetta  fell  in  love  with  her.    and  then  they  became  fast  friends 
and  what   not.       Fantastic  woman.      Joan  Baez    got  very   involved.     I 
mean,   who  could  resist  these  women?     But  anyhow,  I  don't  recall* 
never   recall,     the   institutionalizing    of    organizations — [laughs]. 
I  can't  remember  that  part  of  it.      That's  awful,    but  I  can't. 

Morris:  Well,   it's  much  more  exciting  to  be  working  with — 

Sally  L:  Yes,  doing.     So  w  e  came  home,  and  we  put  a  board  together  out  here. 

Morris  :  You  and  Ginetta. 

Sally  L:  Me  and  Ginetta.      And  got  an  office,    rented  an  office — 

Morris:  With  your  own  donations,    or  did  you  go — 

Sally  L:      With  donations.      We'd  gone  around,  shaken  our  friends  down,   and 

then  we  must  have  had  them    give  money  to  Amnesty,    because    I  had  to 
be   the  funding  agent.      I  guess  they  were  willing. 

Morris:        Do  you  remember  how   much  you  had  to  put  together  before  you 
thought  you  had  enough  to  start  an  office? 

Sally  L:     I  don't.      I  asked  Ginetta  for  some  record  of  it.   and  she  has  no 

record  of   these  things.      I  don't  know.      I  really  don't  know.      I  do 
remember  the  foundation  that  I  worked  on.     It's  a  funny  name.      But 
the   person  who  ran  the  foundation  was  a  woman  by  the  name  of   Mary 
Anna  Colwell. 

Morris:       That's  the  LARAS  Fund. 
Sally  L:     How   can  you — 

Morris:        Mary   Anna  is  somebody  that  I  really  admire,   and  I  got  to  know    her 
when  she  was  running  that  foundation. 

Sally  L:  W  ell,  so  did  I.  I  w  as  able  to  get  som  e  m  oney  from  the  L  AR  AS  Fund. 
I  think  that's  what  paid  for  it.  Maybe  Amnesty  gave  us  some  money 
for  it.  I  really  don't  remember.  And  I  think  we  probably  started 
with  volunteers.  I  don't  know. 


87 


National  Board  Member 


Sally  L:  And  then  very   soon,   we  both  were  appointed  to  the  board. 

Morris:  The   national   board. 

Sally  L:  The  national   board. 

Morris:  I  would  think  so. 

Sally  L:     Ginetta  was   such  a  firebrand.      She  was  not  on  the  executive 

committee,   and   I  was  appointed  to  it  because   I  just   said  "yes" 
to  everybody,     I  guess.      Then  I'd  go  east  once   a  month  for  the 
longest  meetings.      I  mean,    the  longest  meetings, 
[laughs] 

Morris:        Even  longer — 

Sally  L:     Longer   than  ACLU.      Oh,    yes,    because   they   lasted  two  days. 

After   the  meetings   there  would  be  other  meetings.      There'd  be 
meetings   of   the  committees.     And  the  committees!     There  was  a 
f  undraising  committee,  and  we  would  meet  to  talk  about 
fundraising.      And  people  would  take   assignments;   one  man,    who's 
been  in  the  foundation  business  for  years  and  who   shall   be 
nameless    (and  who  was  himself  a  political  prisoner  because  he 
was  a  Vietnam     ref  usee)  would  always  take  these  assignments 
because  he  ran  a  foundation.      And  he  never  ever,    ever  fulfilled 
his  assignment — I'll   never  forget   this.      It  was  just   so 
unpleasant. 

Morris:        Oh,    that's   bad. 

Sally  L:     And  these  meetings  would  be  from  when  the  other  meeting  was  over 
at   nine   o'clock  until   one   o'clock  in  the  morning.      Oh,    my. 


Morris:        Were  your  assignments  to  contact  foundations  or  were  they  to  talk 
to  potential  individual   donors? 

Sally  L:     Yes.      And   people  didn't  really  do  it.      In  those   days,    Amnesty,    the 
people  in  New  York  did  not  really  raise  money.      They   raised  money 
through  direct   mail,    and  at  the  time — when  I  say   "at  the  time," 
I'm   talking  about  in  a  span  of  five  years,    because   I    don't  really 
know  what's  happened  since. 


88 


Direct-Mail   Fundraising;      Pros  and   Cons 


Sally  L:      For  some  reason.    Ginetta  knew   some  young  men  in  Santa  Barbara,    who 
were  starting  a   direct-mail   outfit.     And  they   asked  Ginetta  if 
Amnesty   International  wouldn't  be  interested.      And  she   brought 
that  idea  to  Whitney  Ellsworth,    who  was  until  just  recently  the 
publisher   of   the  New   York  Review   of  Books.      He's   tremendously 
wealthy.      Very   active  in  Amnesty,    in  fact,    today   that's  what  he 
does.      He's   simply   totally   active.      Subscriptions   to   the 
New  York  Review   of  Books  were  sold  through  direct  mail.      So  he  was 
the  expert.      We   started   this   direct-mail   project.and  it  brought  in 
so  much  money.     They  never  had  to  call   the  foundations  or   really 
work  very  hard  on  raising  individual  funds   after   that.      Now   today, 
I  don't  know   what  has  happened.      But   I  do  know    they  never  have  had 
to  have  a  fundraising  board  ever. 

Morris:       What  a  relief. 

Sally  L:     There   are   those   of   us  who  think  that  it's  not  necessarily   a  very 
good  way   to  run  a  board.      I   don't  want   to   go  over  the  politics   of 
Amnesty    International.       I  could,    but   I  don't  really — I  think  there 
are   problems   there. 

Morris:        Do  you  think  board  members  who  do  fundraising  have  a  different 
kind  of  approach? 

Sally  L:      I   have   an  elitist   idea,    which  I  don't  really   like   to  have.      I'm 

stuck  with  it.      The  board  became  over   the  years  more  and  more  and 
more — until  it   is  totally  today  a  democratically  elected  board. 
That,   in  my  view,   results  in  popularity   contest  around  the  United 
States,    not  necessarily  people  who  are  the  most  knowledgable  or 
effective  as   national   board  members.     And  this  is  a  national 
institution,     of   course.      Now    that  is  not   to  say   that  there  aren't 
those  among  them  that  are   competent,    and   all   are   certainly 
dedicated.      Originally,   when  I  went  on  the  board,   we  were 
appointed  by   somebody   or  other.      Then  over   the  years  it   evolved  so 
that  maybe   a  quarter  of   us  were  elected,    then  a  half,    then  three 
quarters.      And   that's   the  way   it   should  be,    because,     after   all, 
the  active  people  in  it  are  the  people  who  work  in  groups  around 
the   country.      But   there   also  have   to  be   people  who  have  national 
stature;    in  my  view,    there  should  be,    for  the  good  of   the 
institution.     And   that  would  be    considered   elitist  at  Amnesty 
International,  I  believe — without  any  question. 

Morris:        But  you  would  think  in  an  organization  of  45,000  members   in  the 
United   States,    that   there's  no  way  you'd  know    most  of   the  people 
on   the  board.      It  would  be   because   of    their  national   reputation 
that  you'd  pick — 


89 


Sally  L :      Oh.    but  you  see  what  happens  is   that  a  large   group  of   people  from 
Berkeley — as  a  matter  of  fact  the  chairman  comes  from  Berkeley 
today.      He's   a   black   professor  at   the  University   of    California. 
And  one   of  the  other  board  members  comes  from  Berkeley  too — I 
forget  her  name.      I  just  learned  this. 

Morris:        In  other  words,    a  bunch  of   people  in  Berkeley,    for  instance,    could 
nominate — 

Sally  L:     That's  right,    and  push  for  it,    and  politick. 

When  I  was  there,    and  beginning  to  leave — although  I  was 
elected,    I'm  proud  to  say,    just  before  I  left.      I  wanted  to  see 
if   I'd  be  elected  nationally. 


Morris : 
Sally  L i 

Morris: 
Sally  L: 


Morris : 

Sally  L: 
Morris : 
Sally  L: 

Morris: 
Sally  L: 


Had  you  already   decided  to  leave? 

Yes,    but   I   didn't  want   to  leave  because   I  wasn't  elected. 

Good  strategy. 

I  would  have  left  anyway   if   I  hadn't  been  elected,   but   I  wanted  to 
see  whether  I  would  be;   because,    I   guess,    if  your   name's  been 
there  long  enough,    maybe  you'd  be  elected,    in  some   cases.      But 
that  becomes  less  and  less  so,   I  think,  and,  as  I  say,  I  don't 
like    to  be   elitist.      But   I  do   think  it's  important  to  have  on  the 
board  people  with  a  national   profile,    because  it's   critical  what 
Amnesty   International   as  an  institution  has  to  say  about  events 
all   over   the  world.      And  you  can't  pick  up  a  paper  for  a  week,    a 
national   paper,    without  reading  what  Amnesty  International  has  to 
say  about  what  is  the   condition  of  human  rights  in  any   country   of 
the  world.      They   say  Amnesty   International   says  this  or  that  in 
Central  America,    or  in  China,    in  any   place,    it's — 

I'd  like   to  go  back  a  minute  to  this  direct   mail   organization  in 
Santa  Barbara.      Do  you  remember  their  name? 

Yes.      Anacapa. 

That's  an  island  off   the   coast  there. 

Now,    I'm  not  even  sure  if  Anacapa   is  a  business  any   more,    but   I 
think  it  is.     But  it  started  its   business  with  Amnesty 
International . 

And  had  the  owners  or   the  operators  had  previous  direct-mail 
experience? 


I   really   don't  know    because    I  didn't  know    the  personnel, 
feeling  that   they  had  had  some  elsewhere. 


I  have  a 


90 


Morris:       Were  they  very   creative,   entrepeneurial — ? 
Sally  L:     For  them   to  go   to  Amnesty   International? 
Morris:        Right. 

Sally  L:     Well.    I  think    [it  was]   a  man  by  the  name  of  Richard  Parker,    who 
later  was  involved  with  Mother  Jones  and  a  lot  of  other   things, 
and  later  still  had  his  own  very   large   direct-mail  outfit  here, 
called  Richard  Parker,    I   guess,   which  made  its  enormous  fortune  on 
having  Greenpeace. 

I  was  told  once  that  direct  mail — I  can't  believe  this  is 
true — is   the   second  biggest  industry   in  this   country.      Could   that 
be  true? 


Morris:       Oh.    I've  read  some  articles  about  political  direct-mail 


Sally  L: 


f undraising.      It  is  a  million  dollar-billion   dollai 
profitable  business. 


-it's   a  very 


Well,    and  when  you  think  that  political   things  are  only  half  of 
it.    and  you  look  at — you  take  what  is  on  your  desk  every  night.      I 
mean  when  you  think  at  how    it's   grown  over  the  years.     Just  think 
what*  s  waiting  for  you  in  the  mail  when  you  get  home. 

It  became  the  most  successful  nonprofit  institution. 
Morris :       Greenpeace? 

Sally  L:     Greenpeace  later  did.     Amnesty   did.      Raising  money — how   am   I 

putting  this?      It  raised  more  money  through  direct  mail   than  any 
other  nonprofit  organization  at  the  time,    for  a  certain  period  of 
time.     They  have,   by  the  way,    changed  from  Anacapa,    so  I   guess 
Anacapa's  not  doing  such  a  good  job  any   more.      But   for  many,    many 
years — it's  a  mammoth  job.      And,    of   course,    it's  an  irresistible 
issue. 


I   don't  know    if  you've  ever  got  any   direct   mail   from   Amnesty, 
but  it's   unforgettable.      It  really   is   unforgettable  stuff.      You 
can  imagine  how   personalized  you  can  make   it.     After  all.   you  can 
give  $5  and  keep  that   person — you  can  save  that   person  from  having 
his  hand   cut  off.      I  don't  know   any   other  organization  like   it.    as 
far  as  how  well  it  was  done  or  really — how   the  material   is 
appropriate  for  direct   mail    is  an  awful   thing  to  say,    but  it  is. 
I  mean,    to  be  able  to   personalize  is  very   compelling.      It's   a 


very.    very,   very   expensive  way   to  raise  money, 
sure   did  and  does. 


But   nonetheless  it 


Morris:        It   gets  you  visibility   overall,    and  the  organization  doesn't  have 
to  do   the   person-to-person  fundraising  and   the   proposal  writing. 


91 


Sally  L:      No,    I  also  have   personally — it  may  be  ridiculous — sort   of  ethical 
feelings    about   it.      We   don't   do,    by   the  way.      Ploughshares   doesn't 
do  it. 

Morris:        Doesn't  do   direct  mail? 

Sally  L :     No. 

Morris:        You  think  there  are  some  ethical   problems  with  it? 

Sally  L:      I  have  a  problem  with  it.      I  have  a  problem  with  advertising  in 
any  way  what  you  possibly   can  to  get  somebody's  money.      It's 
stupid.      It's   marketing,    of    course.      We    don't   do  it  for  a  very 
good  reason   (although   there  are  members  of  our  board  who  think  we 
should)   because  we'd  be  in   competition  with  people  we  fund,    who 
use   direct   mail.      If    they're  big  enough,    they   use   direct  mail. 
Certainly  not  all  of  them,    but   some   of   the   grass-roots 
organizations  that  we  fund  certainly  use   direct  mail,    or  all  kinds 
of   other  f  undraising  techniques  in  the  world. 

I   guess   one   reason   I   think  it's  unethical    is  the  way   it's 
used.      For  instance,    that  business   of  Greenpeace,    and  its   seal — 
the  baby   seal   that  was   thought  up  by   somebody.     Greenpeace  has 
done   almost  nothing  to   save  baby   seals.      That   isn't  really   the 
organization's   main  focus.      But   I  know   how    manipulative  it   can  be. 
That's  no  reason,    I   guess.      Greenpeace   does   do   good  work,    but 
mass  mailings   can  be  manipulative. 

Morris:       Well,   you're   saying  that   some   direct  mail   is   better  than  others. 
Sally  L:     That's  right. 

Morris:        There's   a  quality   question.      And  the  question  also  comes   up  that 
sometimes  the  people   doing  the  direct  mail — the   companies — are 
more  interested  in  the  money   than  in  the  cause. 

Sally  L:      Of   course.      And   I  also  know — I've  had  now   an  experience  looking  at 
some  of   it  in  detail,    where  they   tell  you  that  if  you  fund  such 
and  such,    such  and  such  is   going  to  happen.      Then  the   direct  mail 
outfit   finds   out   that  that's  not  a  popular  such  and  such,    so   that 
it  is   changed  in  the  next  letter  that  is   sent  to  the   so-called 
"universe. " 

Morris:        I  suppose   somewhere  you  can  go  and  take  a  workshop  on  how   to  take 
your  issue  and  personally   present  it   so  that  it  will   influence 
people. 

Sally  L:      I   can  give  you  the  list  of   many   places  that  you  can  go  to  learn 
it.      But  also  many   places   that  you  can   go  to  have  it   done  for 
you — my   God.      I   don't  know.      It's   probably   silly   of   me.      It's   all 


92 


Sally  L:      f undraising  in  a  way.      I   don't  know    that  you  can  call  mass 
mailings  manipulative.      But  sometimes  they  are  very 
straightforward. 

So.  stupidly.  1  was  against  it  at  Amnesty,  but  I  was 
certainly  very,  very,  very  wrong.  My  God,  it's  expensive, 
really  expensive,  even  when  you  make  a  lot  of  money. 


It  is 


Morris:        In  terms   of   the   percentage   that   goes  into  the   producing  of   the — 

Sally  L:      Into   the  f  undraising  thing,    yes.      Particularly   at  the  outset.      It 
doesn't   pay   off  for  three  years,  typically.      One   time.    Amnesty  was 
kept  off   the  Better  Business  Bureau  listing  of   nonprofits  for 
spending  too  much  money   on  its  f  undraising.      I  remember   this.     And 
the  bureau  was  actually  right,    because  I  am  not  sure  of  the 
figure,   but  I  believe   the  figure  was — if  you  can  believe  it — that 
if  you  spent  more  than — guess  what  percent — 50   percent.      Imagine. 
And  there  are  many,    many,    many,    many  organizations  that   spend  50 
percent  of   their  money    f undraising.      Did  you  now   that? 

Morris:        I  know   that  foundations  have  been  fussed  at  for  the  amount  of 

money   that  it  costs  to  run  the  foundation.      The  rule  of   thumb  is 
something  like  10  percent  or  15   percent.    I   think. 

Sally  L:      Fifteen  percent,    I  think.      We  spend,    I  think — I  was  just  looking 
at  the  figures,    the  rough,  very,  very  rough  figures,    between  what 
we   give  away — we  haven't  gotten  to  Ploughshares,    I'll  tell  you 
when  we   get  to  Ploughshares,  if  you  want   to  know. 

Morris:        Was   there  any   special    reason,    question  about  Amnesty  that  made  you 
decide  to  get  off  the  board  or  was  it  that  you  were  already 
involved  in  the  early  stages  of  Ploughshares? 

Sally  L:      Oh.    in  those  years   Ploughshares  was  not  yet  even   conceived.      No. 

there  are  numbers  of   things.      One   of    the  things  is  I  am   not.    never 
was.   never,   never  was   a  human  rights  specialist.      There  are  human 
rights  specialists,    without  any  question.      So  again,    just  like   in 
Ploughshares,    like   I   told  you  at  the  outset,    here   I  was  a  non- 
specialist  caring  about   it.    trying  to  make   something  work.     And 
there   comes  a  point  where  you  really  aren't  needed  any  more. 

All   I  could  do  really  was  try   and  build  the  place,    try   and 
help   get  an  administration.      But  as  far  as  policy  went.    I  wasn't 
really   any   better   than  the  next   person,    and  shouldn't  have  been 
making  policy.      I   could  make   policy  as  far  as   trying  to   get  the 
three   prisoners    I  was   responsible   for.    but   that's  all.      Plus   the 
fact,    unless  you  are  really  a  good  specialist,    it  is  such 
depressing  business.      It  wasn't  good  to  get  up  in  the  morning  and 
know  you  were   going  to   go  to  work — 

Morris:       What  do   the  specialists  do  about   the  depressing  aspect? 


93 


Sally  L:      I   think  specialists  anywhere — it's   like  none  of  us  would  like  to  do 
a  cancer  operation.      It  would  be   too  terrible,    but   certainly  not 
for  an  oncologist,   no. 


Adoptee  in  India 


Morris:       Who  was  your   third  adoptee? 

Sally  L:     Oh,    well,    we  had  numbers  of   them   over  the  years.      We'd  succeed  in 
getting  them  free,    some   of   them. 

One  was  an  Indian  who  was  the  mayor  of  a  town  there,    when 
Mrs.   Ghandi   threw   him  into  jail.      That  is   unbelievable — oh,    dear! 
Tom  Lay  ton  went  across   India     to  bring  him  some  books.      If  you 
think  I'm  crazy — [laughs]— wait  until  you  interview   Tom. 

I   did  absolutely  something  terrible.      In  Amnesty  you're  not 
supposed  to   contact  your  prisoner  directly   unless  you — this  is 
breaking  the  rules — unless  you  get  a   clearance  from  London.      You 
can  contact  him,    but  not   see  him.      In  fact,    you're  not   supposed   to 
do  practically   anything  without   getting  clearance  from  London.      So 
when  Tom  and  Ginger  were  going  (and  Tom  is  nothing  if  not  an 
adventurer),    we  knew,    and  I  don't  recall  why,    but  this  man  needed 
some  books,   wanted  some  books.     He  wanted  them  on  Marxist  theory — 
naturally,    what   else?      It  didn't  have  to  be   in  Hindu,  fortunately. 
I  think  it  could  be  in  English.      I  remember   combing — there   used  to 
be 'a  communist  bookstore  down  near  the  Mission — to  get  him  these 
books. 

Then  when  they   got  to  India,    Tom   got  on  a  bus.      [laughs]      He 
really   should  tell  you  this  story,    but  that's   all    right — it   took 
him  something  like  eight  hours  on  the  bus   to  get  to  this  place. 

He  went  to  the  prison,   went  up  to  the  prison,    and  whoever  it 
was   said,    "What  do  you  want?"     And  he  said,    "I  want  to  bring  so- 
and-so  some  books,"  and  they  pulled  out  a  gun.      He   could  have   been 
injured,    now    that  I  think  about   it  actually.      So  he  went  away, 
quite  wisely.      There  were  crowds,    Indian  crowds  in  white   dhoties 
around  the  prison,    and  he  ran  into  a  man  who  was  this  mayor's 
attorney.      The  attorney   said  he  would   bring  in  his    client's   books, 
so  poor  Tom   got  on  a  bus  and  rode   all   the  way  back.     He  had 
correspondence  with  this  man  for  I  don't  know  how  long. 

Oh,    and  then,    I  think  it  was  on  the  same  trip — I'm  quite  sure 
it  was  a  month  or  so  later,    so  it  was   a  long  trip — that   Mrs. 
Ghandi  was  made  to  change  her  policy.      And  overnight  there  were 
parades.      So  fascinating,    because   they  are   the   organized 


94 


Sally  L:  underground.  How  can  you  get  50.000  people  out  on  parade  with  a 
band  going  and  the  costumes  on  overnight?  And  our  mayor  was  let 
out  of  j  ail  1 

Then  when  Tom  came  back  and  reports  his  story,  I  got  bloody 
hell  from  headquarters  for  having  anybody  go  to  see  the  prisoner 
without  permission. 

Morris :        London  knew  about  it — 

Sally  L:      I   don't  know   how.      I  think  maybe   I  wrote  proudly —     You're 
supposed  to  report  everything,  you  know. 

Morris:        While  you  were  on  the  board,    were  you  aware  of   any  effort  to 
infiltrate  Amnesty  and  take  it  over  for  political  purposes? 

Sally  L:     No.    never,    never,    never.      I've  never  been  on  any   board,    with  the 
exception  of  years  ago,   as  we  talked  about,   at  the  Council   of 
Civic  Unity,    ever   that  I've  seen  an  attempt  to  infiltrate, 
although  I've  known  many   people  who  believe  in  conspiracy  and, 
believe  me,    there  were  those  Amnesty  people  who  constantly  said 
that  the  phone  was  being  bugged,    and  that  files  were  being 
searched.      I  have  never  ever,    ever  seen  that.      But   I  think  that 
maybe   I'm  not  importrant  enough.      I  never  could  even   get 
blacklisted. 

Morris:  Well,    that  was  a  mark  of   honor  for— 

Sally  L:  Of   course.      And   I  never  have  been.      I've  never  made  it. 

Morris:  That's  an  absolutely  fascinating  story. 

Sally  L:  More  fun  than  sitting  in  a  board  meeting,   you  agree? 

Morris:  Oh,    absolutely,    even  if  you're  shaking  in  your   shoes. 


Lilienthal    Family  Views 


Morris:        I'll  bet  your  husband  was  very   pleased  when  he  heard  that  you  did 
not  go  to  Greece. 

Sally  L:     Well,    I   don't  know    that  he  was.      Well.    I  guess  he  was.      But.    Phil 
never  said.    "No."     He  was   back  here  encouraging  me. 

Morris:        Well,    he  probably   figured  Ginetta  would  have  it  under  control.      Is 
she   still   as  active? 


95 


Sally  L:      Oh,  yes.     She  is.     Although  she's  not  quite  as  active  today.     I 
think   she's  writing  a  book  about  her  experiences  right  now.      I 
think  she's  just  off   the  board.      I   think  she  was   the  head,    for 
instance,    when  they  did,    last  year  or  the  year  before,    this 
concert   thing  around  the  world  for  Amnesty   International. 

Morris:        Did  your   children  get  involved  in  your  Amnesty   activities? 

Sally  L:     No.      My   children  are,    as   they  would  say,    "politically   correct," 

which  is  a   term   I  always  loved.     They've  given  money,   but  none  of 
them  have   ever  involved  themselves  in  politics.      Isn't   that 
interesting?      I   shouldn't  say  politics — in  things   that  have  to  do 
with  activism  or  involvement  with  social  problems.     One  of  them 
does  a  little  bit,    but  that's  really  her  profession  through 
something  like  journalism.      No,   not  as  an  activist. 

Morris:        Did  they   fuss  at  you  about   getting  involved  in  such  things? 

Sally  L:     No,    I   think  they're  proud  of  it.      I  was  having  lunch  with  a  friend 
of  mine  who  is  a  great  expert,    in  fact  a  wonderful  woman,    whose 
name  is  Phyllis  La  Farge — a  great  expert  on  what  to  do  in 
educating  children  in  the  nuclear  age.      She  was  an  editor  of 
Parents  magazine.      She's   really   interested  in   children's   education 
altogether,    but  particularly  as  far  as  it  deals  with  traumatic 
experiences   that  are  outside  their  own  family   situations. 

Every  place   I  go  in  the  country,    people  ask  me  as  a  woman, 
particularly  young     parents,   what  am  I  going  to  do  about   my 
teenage   children,    my  youngsters  who  are  frightened  there'll  be  no 
future  for  them,    etcetera.      You  can  understand  all   those  questions 
that  might  come  up. 

And  I   asked  her  last  week  what  she  answers  to  such  questions. 
She   said  that   the  number  one   thing  is   that  parents  are   doing 
something  about   it — then  children  feel   all   right  about  it,    and  may 
be  able  to  go  on  and  do  something  themselves.      But  it  takes   away 
their  fears,    and  fear  incapacitates.      And  during  the  course  of   it. 
you  can  go  into  how  it  affects   people  who  take   drugs,    and  how — you 
can  extrapolate  easily  from  all  that. 

I  think  my  children — I  know   my  children  were  always  proud  of 
my   activities — particularly  against  the  Vietnam  war.      My  oldest 
grandchild  is   going  to  be  fourteen  tomorrow.      She  isn't   involved 
in  these   things   at  all,    but   I  heard  her  tell  her  little  friends, 
"You  know   my   grandmother  is  involved  in   peace."     So   that   I'm 
taking  care  of   it  for  the  family.      That's  a  terrible  mistake. 

Morris:       Why   don't  we   stop  here  for  today. 


96 


Managing  Policy 

[Interview  4:  October  13,  1987 ]## 


Morris : 


Sally  L: 

Morris: 
Sally  L: 

Morris : 
Sally  L: 


Morris: 
Sally  L: 


Before  we  get  into  the   starting  of   Ploughshares,    I  wanted  to  ask  a 
couple  more  questions  about  Amnesty.      On  the  order  of  how   much 
time  did  you  spend  on  being  on  the  national   board  and  Northern 
California? 

It  wasn't  only  that.      I  also  ran  a  group,    which   took  quite  a  lot 
of   time.      It's  hard  to  know    these  things   unless  you  keep   office 
hours.      I  would  say   certainly   more  than  half  my  time.      Oh,    easily 
more  than  half  my   time. 

That's  a  tremendous   commitment  to  put   into  any   one   organization. 
Was  your  major  responsibility  in  the  fundraising  and  resource 
development? 

In  building  an  organization,    I  think,    getting  people  involved  in 
the  first  place,   and  then  in  managing  policy,   helping  to  manage 
policy   in  the  California  office,    which  at  that  time  was  in  San 
Francisco.      Actually  not  very  much  in  fundraising. 

Other  people  were  doing  that  or  the  money  just  rolls  in? 

The  money  rolls  in.      As  I  mentioned  last   time,    they  had  the  most 
successful   direct  mail,    mass-mailing  plan  that  at  the  time  had 
ever  been  heard  of.      That  began  maybe  two  years   after  I  began  with 
Amnesty,   but   by   that  time  it  was  a  national   institution.     Before 
that  it  was  an  institution  of  wonderful  egos  like  Roger  Baldwin, 
but  they   really  weren't  trying  to  run  this  thing  as  a  business  and 
make  it  grow.      They  were  worrying  desperately  about  what  was 
happening  to  individuals  who  were  being  tortured  and  killed  around 
the  world,    but  they  weren't  trying  to  build  a  national 
institution. 


Is   that  what  you  mean  by   managing  policy? 
haven't  heard  before. 


That  is  a  phrase  I 


Yes.      Yes.      The  way   I  would  think  of   that  is   deciding  what  policy 
is,    although  in  this   case,    in  Amnesty   International   generally — 
this  is  a  little  complex — generally  the  policy   is   decided  for  you, 
because  the  rules   come  out  of  London,    where  the   general    secretary 
is.      So   there  are  certain  fundamental   operational    rules  Amnesty 
has   gone   by   over  the  years,    and   the   policy   does  not   change.      But 
management   policy   changes,    because  how   many   groups  can  you  as  an 
organization  actually   service  in  this   country?      And   that  is 
policy,    that  is  management. 


97 


Sally  L:     Let  me  tell  you  just  the  opposite   side   of   this  for  a  minute. 

How    are  we  going  to  get  this  prisoner  out  of  wherever  can  be  a 
policy   decision  too.      Should,    for  instance,    letters   come  from 
concerned  individuals  all   over  the  world?      If  the  prisoner  is  well 
known,   you  might  be  able  to  organize  more  protest  from   all   over 
the  world  than  if  he  is  not.     Let's  say  that  you  have,   as  I 
mentioned  last  time,    a  minister  of  importance  in  the  Chilean 
government.      What  should  our  general   policy  be  toward  trying  to  do 
something  about  not  only  his   situation  but  the  horrible   situation 
for  all  prisoners  of   conscience   in  Chile?      I   could  go  on  about 
this.     How   does  one   case   affect  other   cases  where  human  rights  are 
abrogated? 

Amnesty,    it  happens,  doesn't  join  with  other  organizations.      I 
don't  know    that  it's   unusual,    to  me  it's   rather   unusual.      While 
there  are  many   human-rights  organizations,    this  is  by  far  the 
biggest,    and  arguably,    I   think,    the  most  effective  and   certainly 
internationally  the  best  known.      It   doesn't  work  with  other 
organizations,    so   therefore  it's  making  policy  for  Amnesty 
International . 

Morris:        In  the   sense  of   supporters. 

Sally  L:     Yes,   but   the  way  Amnesty   works  is  basically  this.     Groups  of 

people  are   organized  that  meet  at  regular  intervals.      Each  group 
is  typically   given  three  prisoners  from   different  parts  of   the 
world,    and  it  is   the   group's  responsibility   to   do  what  it   can  to 
get  those  prisoners  out  of   captivity,  to  stop  their  torture,    or 
keep   them  from  being  killed.      And  then  on  to  help  their  families. 
It  can  be  a  pool  of  things  that  one  might  do.     It's  the  group's 
responsibility  to  do  what  it  can.      Now    the   group  members   get   all 
kinds  of   technical   help  from   the  national  and  international 
offices,    but   group  members   do  quite  a  lot  of  work.      It's   a 
responsible,    hands-on  job. 

That's   the  basis   of   Amnesty   International   all  over  the  world. 
That's   the  way   it  is   run.      It's   a  marvelous   organizing  technique. 
It   is   fabulous   because   it's   one   of   the  few   organizations   I've  ever 
known  about,   Gabrielle,    that  you  as  a  participant  are  actually 
doing  something  besides  either  raising  money  or  putting  on  a 
benefit,    or — 

Morris:        They're  doing  what  the  organization — 

Sally  L:      They're   doing  what   the   organization's   about.      I'm   always   trying   to 
think  of   instances.      In  the  peace   field  there  are  some — and  it 
would  be  like  a  hospital  where   people  that  are  supporting  it  are 
really  taking  care  of   the  sick,    in  a  way. 


98 


Philanthropy   in  San  Francisco;   Advocacy 


Morris:        Earlier  on.    you  said  that  you  had  found  that  there  were  more  people 
in  other  cities   that  were  interested  in  philanthropy   than  there 
are  in  the  Bay  Area.      I  wondered  if  you  could  talk  a  little  bit 
more  about  that.      Was  it  through  Amnesty   that  you  came  to  this 
conclusion? 

Sally  L:      It  wasn't  Amnesty.      This  is  a  few  years  of  being  involved  in  these 
things.      Years  ago.    the  United  Crusade,    I  think  at  that  time  it 
was  perhaps  even  called  the  community   chest,    used  to  send  out  a 
list  of  the  people  who  gave  $1000  and  over  to   community   chest 
locally.      It  was  immensely  surprising.      Some  friend  of  mine  went 
through  it  one  day  and   said,    "Do  you  know   that  only   three  members 
of   the   Pacific  Union  dub  are  on  this?      This  is  a  very   funny   list." 

There's  a  lot  of  money,    of   course,    for  opera  and  for  the 
arts.      For   the  major  arts  there's  a  lot  of  money.      I  don't  know 
how  it  compares  to  other  towns.      Somebody  was  telling  me  today 
that  there  are  about  45  billionaires  in  the  United  States.      And 
when  I  hear  about  the  kinds  of   gifts   given  to  places  like   the 
Metropolitan  Museum,    I  can't  but   think  that  San  Francisco  is  small 
potatoes.      Those  are  all  prestigous  kinds  of  gifts.      Of   course — 
gifts  that  bring  prestige  to  the  donor. 

I   think,   in  our  little  way.   in  San  Francisco  that  becomes 
more  and  more  so,    in  terms  of  giving  by  wealthy   corporations  or 
wealthy  new   investors.      I   don't  know.      When,    every   six  months   or 
so,    I   go   to  somebody's  house  like  that.    I'm  just  dumbfounded  at 
the  way   they  live.     And  that  kind  of  money,    I  think,  you  should 
expect  it  will  be  given  to  the  arts.      Maybe  to  hospitals,    I  don't 
know.      I  would  doubt  it.      Maybe  in  services,   but  I   don't   think  so. 

As   far  as   funding  for  social   causes — I  don't   think  this  is  a 
city   that  is  very   charitable.      I   really    don't.      I   think   that   there 
are  some  wonderful   family  foundations,    but   I  wonder  if  there  are 
many  other  philanthropists   devoted  to  social   change.      I   think  that 
Northern  California  Grantmakers  is  the  most  extraordinary 
organization,    but  at  the  same  time,    there  are  not   that  many 
foundations  that  advocate. 

Well,    I  should  step  back  a  minute,   because  when  I   said  that. 
I  realized   that  it  isn't  true.      Because   the  Hewl   tt   Foundation 
gives  an  enormous  amount   of   funding  for  population  control   around 
the  world.      You'd   say   that  was  advocacy. 

And  there's  a  lot  of  private  money   that  goes   from    San 
Francisco  toward  population  control.      I  meant  more  political 
advocacy.     I   guess.       It's   hard   to   separate  it  out,    but   I   don't  mean — 


99 


Morris:        You're  talking  about  the  public  affairs. 

Sally  L:      I'm  talking  about   public  affairs  advocacy.      Now    there  are  a  few 
foundations  here   that   do,    but    I   think   that's  very   unusual.      It's 
interesting  though,  that  there  are  very   few   in  the  United  States. 

Morris:  Well,  there's  even  some  debate  about  whether  or  not  foundations  in 
general  should  give  funds  to  organizations  whose  stated  purpose  is 
to  change  public  policy,  which  is  an  interesting  situation. 

Sally  L:     But  it  wouldn't  make   any   sense,    of   course.      Then  foundations 
couldn't   give  any  money   to  AIDS    [Acquired   Immune  Deficiency 
Syndrome],   or  one   couldn't  give  any   money   to  the  homeless,    or  to 
try  and  affect   care  of   children — grants   designed  to   change  the 
causes  of   the  problems,  not  only  the  devastating  symptoms. 

Morris:        Well,    the  traditional   charity  in  its  older  sense  is   that  it's   a 
good  thing  to  provide  food  and  shelter  for  someone  who  was  in 
need.      And  then  you  get  over  into  the  question,   making  a  judgment 
that  it  is  not  a  good  thing  for  the  society   to  have  homeless  and 
hungry   people.      Therefore,    the   community   should  do  something  about 
it,    and  then  you' re  getting  into  the  issue   area. 

Sally  L :     Well,    think  of  how  many  foundations  there  are  that   give  money   to 
minority  youth  training. 

Morris:       But  that's  to  help  somebody  help — 

Sally  L:     This  is  to  help  somebody   help  themselves,    yes.      That's  right. 

And  then  back  up — in  the  environmental   field,    I   think  the  ten 
large  environmental   funds   in  this   country  have  gotten 
extraordinary  support,    as  you  know,    in  the  last  twenty  years,    and 
from    foundations.      And  those   are  certainly  advocacy   organizations, 
aren't  they? 


100 


X     CREATING   THE   PLOUGHSHARES   FUND.    1979-1980 


Preliminary   Thoughts  and  Discussions;      Personal   Concern  About 
Nuclear  War;    Scarcity   of  Donors 


Morris:        Were  your  discussions  about   the  need  for  more  advocacy  when  you  and 
Mr.   Lilienthal   first   thought  about   starting  Ploughshares? 

Sally  L:     No.      No,   they   weren't  about   that  at  all.      It  was  about   the  fact 
that — it  was  really   my   thought.      I   don't  mean  that  he  wasn't 
supportive,    he  was.      I  don't  think  I   thought  about   it  that  far  at 
all.      I  just   thought,    as    I'm   sure    I've   said   over  and   over  again, 
that  the  best  vay   one   could  financially   support  the  prevention  of 
nuclear  war,   and  there  was  no  point  in  working  on  it  anyway 
unless  it  was  the  prevention  of   nuclear  war — or   I   shouldn't  say 
that,    it's  rather  an  exaggeration.     That   it  is   the   most   important 
thing  that  one   can  give  money   to.      And  there  is  no  way,    still 
there  isn't,   to  make   decisions  on  what  were   the   best   grants  one 
could  make   to  work  on  the  worst  problem  of   all,    of  knowing  what  is 
the  research,   what  are   the   organized  activities,   what  is   the   best 
way  to  involve  a  large   public  and  its    government   in  preventing  a 
nuclear  war  and  halting  the  arms  race. 

Morris:        How   did  you  arrive  at  the  conclusion  that  the  prevention  of 

nuclear  war  was — how  did  you  get  from  Amnesty  to  prevention  of 
nuclear  war? 

Sally  L:     Well,    I  guess  that's  obvious.      There  could  be   a  bomb  at  any 

second,    so  there  wouldn't   be  much  point  in  trying  to   save  one 
individual's   life.      Unfortunately,    though,    one   always   gets   one's 
heart  involved  with  one   or  another   person  or   groups   of   people — 
starving  people,    people  in  the  streets,    maltreated  children. 
Actually  when  you're   talking  about   something  as   cosmic  as   a 
nuclear  war,    it  is  harder  to  become  personally   involved — 
emotionally   involved.     But   through  my  own   giving   patterns,    I  had 
become  more  and  more  involved  in  supporting  organizations  working 
to  reverse   the  arms  race  and  end   the   threat   of   nuclear  war. 


101 


Morris : 
Sally  L: 


Morris: 


Sally  L; 


To  individual   organizations? 

Yes,    to  individual   organizations.      I  don't  know   that  I  gave  so 
much  away.      I  really   don't  know.      I've  never  examined  it,    but   I 
thought  about  it  a  lot.    and  talked  about  it  a  lot,    and  was 
interested  in  it.      There  weren't  organizations  that  were  that  well 
known  either  in  the '7 Os — they  just  really  began  to  get  a  wider 
audience  in  1980. 


What  about  Carnegie  and  Rockefeller? 
going.     Were  you  aware  of   those? 


They  had  some  peace  programs 


Well,    they   didn't  in  the  same   sense.      There  is  the  Carnegie 
Institute  of   International   Peace.      That's  what  Mr.    Carnegie  left 
in  that  wonderful   will,    in  which  he  said — see,    that's  just  part  of 
the  Carnegie  Corporation,   but  you  know    that.      He   said  in  his  will 
that  the  money   should  go   to  it  as  long  as  peace  has  not  been 
arrived  it.     When  peace  was  arrived  at.    then  that  money   should   go 
to  hospitals  and  libraries,    etcetera. 

Rockefeller — I  don't  know  which  Rockefeller  you  talk  about — 
but  Rockefeller,    the  big  one,    has   given  very   little  money   to  peace 
as  such.     Peace  is  too  amorphous  a  word  to  use  in  this 
connection.      I'm   talking  about   dealing  with  programs  to  affect 
public  opinion,   which  in  turn  one  would  hope  would  affect 
government  opinion.      How   to  get  out   of   the  cold  war — try  and 
alleviate  at  least  the  threat  of  nuclear  conflict.      The 
Rockefeller  Foundation  hasn't  given  that  kind  of   money.      Now    the 
Rockefeller  Family   Fund  has  and  the  Rockefeller  Associates.      Both 
of    these   groups  are  made   up  of   grandchildren  of  John  D. 
Rockefeller.      Rockefeller  Brothers  Fund — this  is  more  than  you 
want  to  know    I'm  sure — gave  very  little  money  to  support  anti-war 
programs,    compared  to  how  much  money  it  has. 

Actually   there  are  very,    very   few   foundations  that  give  money 
in  this  area.      Very  few.      And  in  fact,    I   don't  know  how  many 
because   no  study   has  been  made,    but   I've  no  reason  at  all   to  think 
that  it's  increased  in  the  last   six  and   one-half  years   since 
Ploughshares  was  founded     and  I  became  aware  of  foundation 
philanthropy   in  this  field.     Anyway,   about  the   time  we   started 
Ploughshares,    there  was  an  article  in  Foundation  News  that  said 
that  only  one   cent  out  of   every   dollar  went  into  the   prevention  of 
nuclear  war  or  to  Soviet- American  relations.     One   cent  of   every 
foundation   dollar.      It's  not   the  individual    dollar.      Nor  is  it   the 
dollars  from   church  groups.     As  you  know,    the  largest  amount  of 
philanthropy  money   goes  to  and  from  church  groups. 

Before  the  first  meeting  of  Ploughshares,    I  went  to  a  meeting 
which  had  been  called  in  New   York.      It  was   called  the  Yacht   Club 
Group,    because  Admiral  Gene  La  Rocque  had  lent  a  room   at  the  Yacht 
(Hub.     And  there  were  very   few   foundations   there.      There  were   some 


102 


Sally  L:      individuals  who  give  money  in  this  area — we  met.    met.    met.      I 

mean,    we  kept   going  to  meetings,    and  that  was  really  valuable  to 
me. 

You  mentioned  Rockefeller;  a  woman  named  Hilary  Palmer,   who 
ran  the  international   part  of  Rockefeller  Brothers,    came  to  that 
first  meeting  because   one  member  of   her  board  had  said. 
"Shouldn't  we  be  looking  at  this  nuclear   threat?"     She  was   so 
minded.     Only  one  member  of   her  board.      She    [Palmer]    is  an 
enormously  capable  woman.      She  kept  coming  to  these  meetings,    and 
studying  matters,    and  so  forth,    and  finally.    I  think,    I'm   sure  at 
least  a  year  and  a  half  later,    she  was  able  to  convince  her  board 
to  give  one  grant  maybe,    probably  to  some  sort  of  academic 
research. 

There  certainly  were  foundations  that  got  into   this  field  by 
knowing  there  was  this  center  group  that  was  meeting  and 
discussing  the  problems  and  opportunities.      But   the  giving  is  so 
limited.      It's   amazing.      MacArthur  has  made  a   great   big 
difference   and  will   make   more  of   a  difference.      Of   course.    I  don't 
know  what  their  plans  are  in  the  future.      MacArthur  tends   to 
change   policy    from  year  to  year.      But,    rather  interesting,     I 
understand, and  tremendously  important;   they  are  looking  at 
Europe — I'm  jumping  ahead — 

In  Western  Europe   today   (I   didn't  mean  to  get  off   the 
subject)   there  is  much  more  real   discussion  among  the  eminent,    from 
young  people  in  government.   Western  and  even  Eastern  Europe,    about 
thinking  on  alternative  security  ideas  on,    for  instance. 
nonpr evocative    defense.      Very    interesting,    because   that's   not   true 
only   in  Western  Europe,   but  also  in  the  Soviet  Union  and  also  in 
Eastern  Bloc  countries.      Its  interesting,    really.      So  I  hope 
MacArthur  does  nurture  these  discussions  with  its  enormous 
resources.      MacArthur's  almost  been  closed  down  for  not  giving  a 
big  enough  percentage   of   its   capital   away  in  the   past. 

Morris:       What  a  remarkable  situation  to  be  in. 

Sally  L:     Ruth  Adams,   who  runs  that   part  of   it  has  had  a  terrible   time, 

although    it's   much  better   today.      She's   threatened   to  leave,    so 
the  board  finally  came  around  to  a  less   chaotic  way   of   grant- 
making.      But   the  directors   still   tend  to  give  grants  in  a  hand-to- 
hand  sort  of  way.      I   think  one  year,    the  year  before  last,    they 
gave  out.    I   think  twelve  or  so  grants  of   about   $250   thousand 
each  to  universities  to  do  a  peace   program  without  any   planning 
at  all.      At   the  University   of   California,    which   is   the  place  with 
which  you're   the  most  familiar,    they   still  haven't  figured  out 
what   to  do  with  it.     And  Berkeley   is   certainly  not  alone   in 
this. 


103 


Sally  L:      Carnegie  does  a  lot  of   the   same  thing,    which  is  very 

disappointing.      They   give — big  foundations  like   Carnegie  and 
MacArthur  and  even  Ford — these  enormous  block  grants  to 
universities  and  the  universities  take  half  of   them — 

Morris:        For  overhead. 

Sally  L:     War/ peace   issues  are  not  a  very  popular  field  for  most 
foundations. 

Morris:        Is   that  why  you  decided  to  start  your  own  fund? 

Sally  L :  No,  I  didn't  know  anything  about  foundations.  I  had  never  heard 
about  these  places,  except  for  the  biggest  ones  by  name  only,  and 
the  local  ones  which  I  had  approached  for  grants  for  other  causes. 


Personal  Giving 


Morris:        It   sounds   to  me  as  if,   excuse  me,   you  had  reached  a  point  in  your 
own  activities  where  you  wanted,    instead  of  using  your  money   to 
help  good  causes,   you  wanted  to  start  turning  your  money  around  in 
ways   that  would  make  a  difference  in  how- 
Sally  L:     No,    it  isn't  quite  that.      By  the  time   several,    several  years 

before,    I  had  decided  only  to  give  money   away  where   I   thought  it 
made   a  difference,    except  for  token  amounts.      And  I  was  working  at 
something  else,    full-time.      No.    it  just   seemed  to  me  that  I   didn't 
want  to  leave  my  money  with — by  the  way,    it  was  not  a  particularly 
enormous  amount — to  the  San  Francisco  Foundation,    to  which  it  had 
been  left.      Although  one   can  say   in  a  letter,    of   course,    I  want  it 
to  go  to  whatever;   but  their  board  it   seemed  to  me  proved  itself 
hardly   exemplary   over  the  years,    and  there's  no  reason  to  think 
it  was   going  to  improve.     I   don't  want  to  leave  it  to  them   to 
decide,    besides  which  they   don't  give  in  this  field.      And  this  is 
the  way  I  wanted  to  give  my  money  away.      That  is  what  I  felt   my 
money  should  go  to  work  for,    forever — 

Morris:        That's  exactly — it's  a  very   clear — 

Sally  L:      It  would  be  laughable  to  talk  about  how    much,   but   still.     That 
thought,    that   I  just   didn't  want  the  San  Francisco   Foundation 
giving  my   money   away  because   they   couldn't  control   it  to  go  to  the 
prevention  of  nuclear  war — that  was   the  exact  thought  that  brought 
about   Ploughshares. 

Morris :        And  then  what   did  you  do? 


104 


Sally  L:      I  changed  my  will  a  bit.      [laughs]      Then,    immediately  having  that 
thought,    then  came  about  all   the  other  things.      Well,    a  lot  of 
other   people  feel   this  way,   and  there  is  no  place,   and  this  much  I 
knew.      There  is  no  place   to  which,    and  this  is   still   true  today. 
to  which  you  could  leave  your  money  and  know    that  it's   going  to   go 
on  working  to  prevent  nuclear  war  in  a   responsible  fashion. 
Except  for  Ploughshares,    there  just  isn't. 

Morris:        How  long  had  you  been  in  contact  with  this  Yacht  dub  Group? 

Sally  L:      Oh,    the  Yacht   Club  Group  is  only  because  .there's   a  man  by   the   name 
of  Gene  La  Rocque.    an  admiral   who  runs  something  called  the 
Center  for  Defense   Information.      One   of   the  better  peace 
organizations.     Well,   maybe   I   gave  them   a  couple  hundred  dollars 
or  five  hundred   dollars  a  year  or  something.      It's  not  that   I  was 
intimately  connected  with   them.      He  gave  the  yacht  club  to  us  to 
have  the  meeting,   and  so  it  was  called  the  Yacht  Club  Group  as  a 
joke,    because  you  can  hardly  imagine  people  who  would  be  less 
likely  to  be  in  a  yacht  club  —  the  groovy-looking  fellows  who  run 
foundations. 

Morris:        Well,   you  don't  think  of   an  admiral,    who  has  been  trained  for 
military  service,   being  an  advocate  for  peace. 

Sally  L:  But  there  are  a  number  that  are,  but  he's  outstanding.  He  and  his 
whole  organization  are  either  admirals  or  generals.  They're  very, 
very  effective,  and  money  pours  in  to  them,  by  the  way. 


Sally  L:     But  anyhow,   of  course  there  were  organizations  I  always  supported. 
Let's   say  SANE  and.    of   course,    there  wasn't   the   freeze   in   those 
days.      I   guess  PSR    [Physicians  for  Social   Responsibility]    had  just 
started.      It   started  long  before   that,    but   I  mean,    it  had   become 
effective  again.      I  supported  a  few   films  that  were  being  made 
showing  what  might  happen  in  case  of  a  nuclear  blast.      Most  of   the 
projects  supported  were  represented  by  people  who  came  to  see  me. 

Morris:        What  I've  heard  is   that  Bill  Roth   seemed  to  have  been  the  magnet 
for  people  with  good  ideas,   and  he  would  say,   go  and   see  Mrs. 
Lilienthal. 

Sally  L:     That's  true.     That's  absolutely  true.     It's  true,  but  it's  also 

true  that  Bill   and   I.   and  Martha  Gerbode.   during  her  lifetime  —  she 
was  long  dead  by   then.      Who  else,    I  don't  know   on  our   side   of 
things.    Qarry  Heller  maybe  —  although  he's  a  bit  eccentric  —  would 
see   these   people.      Bill   does   to  this   day  —  we   send  people   to  each 
other,    because  it's  interesting  to  talk   to  individuals  with   a 
project   of   importance.      You  know   you  can't  get  a   date  with 
Madeleine  Russell.      I'm  not   saying  anything  against   Madeleine,    but 
most   people,    most   philanthropists  —  it's  embarrassing  for  me  to 


105 


Sally  L:      talk  about  myself  as  a  philanthropist  when  I  put   myself  in  this 

group — are  very   hard  to  make   an  appointment  with.      It's  ridiculous 
not  to  meet  with  them  in  person.      You  only   talk  to  the   people  who 
have  something  to  sell.      Either  say  no  or  yes,    but  at  least  learn 
what's  happening. 

Morris:       Were  these  people  who  would  write  to  you  or  that  you'd  meet — ? 

Sally  L:     No,    they  would  write.      Maybe  Bill  put  them  in  touch  with  me — we 
did  it  for  each  other. 

Morris:        That's   fascinating  that  the  three  of  you  had  a  very   good  working 
network  of — 

Sally:          Oh.    there  must  have  been  other  people  too.      Yes,    Bill   and  I   for 
years  and  years  and  years — 


Organizing  Meetings/Group 


Morris:        And  then  what  brought  up  the  idea  to  put  it  into  an  organized  plan? 

Sally  L:      All   right.      So  what  are  you   going  to   do  when  you   don't  want  your 
money   to  go   to  the  San  Francisco  Foundation,    you  want  it  to  go  on 
working  against  nuclear  war?      Could  you  start  a  foundation?      Can 
you  start  a  foundation  with  a  little  money?      So,    I  guess  I  must 
have — and  I  don't  remember  whether  this  was  the  first  thing  I 
did — I   probably  talked  to  Tom,    and  I   certainly  talked  to  Bill. 
Who  else?      Probably  just  Tom  and  Bill. 

So  then  I  went  to  see  some  foundations  that  I  knew,    that  I 
knew  because  of  raising  money  for  the    [NAACP]   Legal  Defense  Fund 
or  something  of   that  sort.      I  went  to  see  Ed  Nathan.      And  Ed  said. 
"Well,    of  course,   you  can  do  it  if  you  want  to.      It   doesn't  matter 
how    small   a  foundation  it   is.      Just   do  it."     He  doesn't  even 
remember   saying  that.      I  had  lunch  with  Ruth  Chance,   and 
obviously,    being  Ruth,    she  said,    "Hooray."     We  had  lunch  in  a 
Chinese  restaurant,    and  I   got  a  fortune   cookie  that   said,    "You 
will  best   succeed  in  some  profession  consecrated  to  the  service  of 
humanity."     I  have  it  taped  on  my   desk  still  at  home.      Anyhow, 
Ruth  said,    "Yes." 

Then  I   guess.    Bill   suggested — he  said  he  had  just  had  lunch 
with  Lew  Butler  and  Lew.   who  has  been  such  a  wonderful   public 
servant,    and  interested  in  so  many   things,    had  said  to  Bill,    "You 
know,    I've  never" — they  were   great  friends  and  worked  together — 
"paid  attention  at  all   to  the  nuclear  threat.      I  really  think  that 
I  ought  to   do  something  about   that.      I've  been  involved  in   the 
environment,   with  health,   with — " 


106 


Morris:        I've  heard  a  number  of   people   say   that,    that   they   don't  know   why 
it   took  so  long  to — 

Sally  L:     Yes.    I  hear  all   the  time  that  people  just  don't  want  to  deal   with 
it  at  all.      Anyway.    Lew    said   that,    so  Bill   phoned  and   said.    "Go 
see  Lew    tomorrow."     So  I  did.      I  barely  knew   him  actually.      I  knew 
him.   but  very   slightly.     He  was   still  at  the  University   of 
California    [San  Francisco]    working  with  Phil  Lee.      I  don't  know    if 
any  of   this  means  anything  to  you.      And  he  was  interested.      He 
said  he  would  come  to  ad  hoc  meetings.      I  knew    Susan  Silk.     And 
Susan,    Tom  [Lay ton] ,   and   I — 

Morris:        Brought  her  husband? 

Sally  L:     No,   although  Tom    [Silk]   put  the  original  papers  together  for 
Ploughshares.     But   the  ad  hoc   committee  that   sort  of   put   this 
together — I  think  Albie  Wells   could  have  been  involved  in  this;    I 
forget  who  else — anyhow,  we  just  talked  about  how  to  do  a  thing 
like  this.     As  we  talked  we  realized  that  there  were  people,  just 
as  you  say.   who  don't  know  what  to   do  about  this  issue  and  would 
like  to  be  involved.      Then  we  thought,    there  are  going  to  be 
people  of  both  political  parties  who  are  interested,    of   course,   in 
global   security,  and  who  would  be  interested  in  giving  some  money 
toward  this. 

Well,    some  funny   things  happened.      I  scotched  the  process 
.  they  suggested.      Immediately,   Lew  and  Bill  (who   sat  on  numerous 
boards   in  very   important  positions,    great  public  citizens,    you 
know.      Bill's    done   everything  in   San  Francisco,    and   nationally.) 
They  said.    "What  you  do  is  you  hire  a  consultant  for  a  year.      You 
give  him   $40,000.    run  it   through  the   San  Francisco   Foundation. 
He'll  help  you.    and  figure  out  whether  it's  feasible."     And  I   did 
everything  that  anybody  told  me.    because  how   did  I  know   how   to 
start  a   foundation  and  in  particular  one  with  no  model.      What  I 
did  was  run  an  art  gallery.      So,    I  went   down  to  see   Martin    [Paley] 
at  the  San  Francisco  Foundation. 

And  he   said.    "Yes.    we'd  be   interested.      Sure,    you  can  run  it 
through  us."     We  were  all  willing  to  put   some  money   into  a 
feasibility   study.     And  then  I  thought   I  probably  know   as  much 
about  this  as  anybody   does.      There  isn't  anybody    that    can  tell    us 
whether  we  can  make  a  foundation  like  the  one  we  had  in  mind  when 
there's  no  model.      How   can  anybody   tell  you? 

Morris:        You  were  already   in  touch  with  a  number  of  organizations  that  were 
working  in  the — 

Sally  L:      In   the  field,   yes.      To  a  degree.      Yes,    not  any   more   than  any   other 
interested   person.      Years   before   I  had  worked  very  hard  doing 
anti-Vietnam   activities,  and  a  lot  of  people  I  knew   then  moved  on 
in  one  way   or  another  to  other  war/peace  issues.      But   there   aren't 


107 


Sally  L:      that  many  progressive  people  in  international  affairs   in  San 

Francisco.      Those  few    that  are  involved  just   sort  of   get  to  know 
each  other.      Also.    I   sat  on  a  national  board. 

Morris:        Amnesty? 

Sally  L:     No,    another  national  board — small  board — I  still  do,    called  Center 
for  International   Policy.      But  there's   so  few    people  in  these 
things   that  you  do  begin  to  know   each  other,    or  you  know   some 
people  involved  in  them. 

Morris:       How   about  connections  or  like-minded  people  from  your  art  gallery 
work? 

Sally  L:     None.      Zero.      But  when — this  was  funny,    because   I  wouldn't  have 
dared   say   so  to  Lew  and  Bill,   as   good  friends  as  we  are,    so 
eminent — they   have   so  much  experience.      But  it  did  occur  to  me  that 
you  couldn't  hire  a  consultant  to   find  out  whether  one  could  do 
something,    as   I  said,    that's  never  been  done  and  that  the 
consultant  himself   didn't  have  experience  with.      1  would  have  had 
to  spend  a  year  finding  a  person  to  do   such  a  job. 

Morris:       Well,    presumably  a  consultant  could  tell  you  how   to  run  a 
foundation. 

Sally  L:     Well,    so   could  Lew.   and  Tom,    and  Susan  Silk.     There  was  no  problem 
with  that.      But  they   couldn't  tell  you  whether  there   could  be   a 
successful    foundation  which  was  raising  money  to  support  global 
security,    and  how  you  would  put  it  together.      I   don't  think  they 
could. 

Morris:        Were  you  acquainted  with  the  people  who  started  the  Vanguard 
Foundation? 

Sally  L:     Oh,    I've  known  Vanguard  for  years.      That  has  nothing  to  do  with  it 
at  all. 

Morris:       True,   but  they  sort  of   self-generated  an  idea  and  went  out  and  did 
it. 

Sally  L:     Entirely   different,    yes,    entirely  different.      Oh,    I  know   them 
intimately.     When  Peter  Stern  and  Obie    [Benz]    started  it,    they 
came  and  talked  to  me  about   it. 

Morris:       Their  idea  is,   as  I've  been  told,  was  to  train  themselves  how  to — 

Sally  L:     Oh,    train  young  people  how    to  be — not  to  be  so  uncomfortable  about 
having  money. 

Morris:        And  also  make   some  efforts  in  areas  that  they  were  concerned 
about? 


108 


Sally  L:      Oh.    yes.      Very    different.      The   philosophy's    different.      In   my  view 
it's  very   different.      I  am  very   familiar  with  it. 

The  board  of   directors  of  Vanguard  does   the  research  on 
grants  and  the  grantees  appear  before  the  members  to  describe  the 
program  for  which  they  want  support.      The   grants  are  all  local  and 
are  all  below    $5,000.      At   the  beginning  they   were  much  smaller. 
Actually,   except  for  the  fact   that  Vanguard  raises   money   in  order 
to  make   grants,    it's  such  a  far  afield  analogy   that  it's  not  worth 
exploring.      There  are  other  foundations   that  are  much  more  like 
Ploughshares  than  Vanguard. 

Morris:        In  the  Bay  Area? 

Sally  L:     No.      Well,    there's   one   that's   something  like   ours  and  is  involved 
with  the  nuclear   threat  and  other  war/peace  issues.      It   started  a 
little  bit  afterwards.      It  is  like  ours  in  that  it's  a  public 
foundation. 

But  to  go  back  to  the  birth  of   Ploughshares,  the  funny   thing 
about  was  this.     After  meeting  with  Martin,  I  called  a  meeting  of 
our  little  group  and  said.    "Okay,    Martin's  willing  to  run  it 
through  the  San  Francisco  Foundation  and,   in  fact,    they  will  help 
put  it  on."    And  the  group  said,  "No.     Forget  it,  we're  not  going 
to  have  anything  to   do  with  them"     So  we   didn't  have  to  have  a 
consultant  after  all.      [laughs]      I  mean  everybody  had  had  pretty 
bad  experiences  with  the  San  Francisco  Foundation,  you  know,   by 
then. 

Morris:       They  would  put  on  a  symposium  on — 

Sally  L:     Well.    Martin  said,    "You  know.    I'm   so  interested  in  this   that   I'm 

going  to  see  if   I  can't  get  the  board  to  help  support  a  consultant 
and  maybe  we  will  decide  who  it   should  be.      I'll   discuss  it  with 
them. "     You  know,    it  was  one   of   those   general   conversations. 

A  few  months  later,    after  Ploughshares  really   got   started,  or 
a  year  later  when  we  had  a  executive  director — Martin  said  he 
wanted  us  to  put  on  a  seminar  for  the  San  Francisco  Foundation  for 
six  weeks,    training  the  distribution  committee  on  our  issues.      We 
were  obviously   the   people  to   do  it.      I   don't  mean  me.    but  the 
people  that  we're  in  touch  with  that  we  work  with.      For  instance, 
our  advisors  and  friends  at  Stanford  or  at  Berkeley — those  who  are 
the  experts  on  these   matters.     We   can  put   together  that   program, 
because   the  experts  are   the   people   that  we  work  with.      I   don't 
mean  we  would  give   the  lectures  ourselves.      But  in  the  end  the 
distribution  committee  of   the  San  Francisco  Foundation  didn't  want 
the  educational   seminars.      So,    anyway   Martin's   suggestion  wouldn't 
have  worked  in  the  first   place. 


109 


Sally  L:      So  that's  how  we  didn't  have  a   consultant.      So   then,    Phil 

Lilienthal   went  with  me.    we  went  East  and  we  saw   a  few  people  in 
foundations  that  I  knew   or.    in  one   case,    some  few   people  who  I  had 
just  heard  of   in  Washington  and  New  York,  and  asked  them  whether 
they   thought   this  was  a  good  idea.      And  they   said,    "Yes,    it's   a 
great   idea."      [laughs]      The   same  kind  of   advice   I  give — "Yes.    do 
it.      Go  for  it." 


Advisers  and  Early  Board  Members 


Morris:       Who  did  you  talk  to? 

Sally  L:      They   weren't  all  appropriate,    I  have  to  say,    David  Hunter,    who  at 
that   time  was   sort  of   the   guru  of   progressive  foundations.      I 
don't  know    if  you've   ever   heard  of   him.      He  ran  the  Stern  Fund  and 
he  was   called  "Deep  Pockets."  because  he  advised  so  many   people   on 
how    to  give  away  money.      Individuals,    you  see,   who  came  to  him. 
and  whose  money  he  gave  away.      So  he  was   the  natural   person  to 
talk  to.      I   talked  to  a  man  with  the  name  of  Phillip  Ruopp—  where 
is  he? — at  one  of   the  Middle-western  big  foundations. 

At   the  time  there  was  a  man  with  the  name  of  Sid  Shapiro  who 
ran  something  called  the  Levinson  Fund,    since  out  of  business;    I 
talked  to  him,    I'm  trying  to  recapture —     One  of   the  major  people 
I  talked  to  was  a  man  who's — well,    there's   probably  nobody  like 
him  in  America,    whose  name  is  Adrian  DeWind,    an  eminent  attorney, 
who  is  the  chairman  of   the  Natural  Resources  Defense  Council  and 
head  of   the  New    School.      He's  always  been  on  the  executive  board 
of  the  Legal  Defense  Fund.     I  could  go  on  and  on  and  on.     And  he 
was   also  the  head  of   the  Bar  of   the  City   of  New   York.      There's 
probably  no  private   citizen  in  the   progressive  field  in  this 
country   that  even  touches  Bill  DeWind.      And  I  happen  to  know   him. 
It's  a  funny,  long  story.      I  hate  to  be   so  long,   Gabrielle. 

Morris:        It's  not  long.      Connections  between  people  and  how   an  idea  grows 
after  it's  implemented  are  important. 

Sally  L:      My   first  father-in-law  was  a  senior  partner  of  a  law   firm,    later 
he  was  of  counsel,  which  became  the  famous  firm  of  Paul,    Weiss, 
Wharton,    Rifkin — I  left  out   something.      And  Garrison.      And  I   first 
met  Bill  DeWind  when  he  was  a  very  young  attorney.      My   father-in- 
law   had  a  party,    I  guess,    for  Tom  and  me.    in  the  New  York 
apartment.      They  had  a  lot  of   people  from   the  firm.      Over  the 
years,  in  most  of   the  organizations  in  which  I've  been  interested, 
except  for  the  art  ones — there  Bill  DeWind  would  be  as   chairman  of 
the  executive  committee  or   somewhere  on  the  top  of  the  list  on  the 
stationery.     Or  when  I  was  on  the  national   boards,    people  would 
ask,    "Is  there  any  way  we  can  get  Bill.     He's  so  busy."     And  I  was 


110 


Sally  L; 


Morris : 
Sally  L: 


always  way  down  on  the  very  bottom   of  the  letterhead,    and   there 
I'd  look   up  and   see — [laughs].      And  I   thought,    here's   somebody   who 
I'd  really  love  to  talk  to,    because  he's   involved  in  all   the 
things    in  which  I'm   interested,    all   the  things   that  I'm  interested  in 
in  my   life.      He's   a  fascinating  guy.      I  went   to   see  him. 
Unfortunately   that   morning  he  could  only  see  us  for  half  an  hour. 
He   couldn't   see   us   the   day   before   because  he'd   been   busy   as   the 
chairman  at  the  New    School   of  a  meeting  on  the  Mary  knoll   Sisters, 
and  the  White  Paper  that   came  out  about   the   situation  in  El 
Salvador.      Do  you  remember?      Carlos  Fuentes  was  the  main  speaker 
at  that   time.      Fuentes   even  had  a  hard  time  with  a  visa.      This 
extraordinary   thinker  and  writer.      And  Bill  was  the  chairman  of 
the  day.     But,    anyway,    the  next  day  he  could  only  see  us  for  a 
half  an  hour,    because  that  damned  George  Bush  had  asked  him  to 
consult  with  him  in  Washington.      And  Bill  is  that  kind  of  a 
person.      He 


He's 


Is  that  his  description  of  George  Bush? 

No.    I   don't   think — his  language   is   more   eloquent   than  that, 
a  very  eloquent  man. 


Morris:  Was  peace  a  progressive  issue? 

Sally  L:  When  we  started  Ploughshares? 

Morris:  Yes. 

Sally  L:  Oh.   yes.      Oh,    left-wing  issue.      You  know   it's  a  left-wing  issue. 

Well,    I  got  letters,   when  I  first  wrote  letters,   which  was 
the  only  way   I  could  raise  money   at  the  beginning,    to  friends. 
And  I  remember  two  of  them  that  said  the  same  thing.      I  remember 
one  particularly  that's  a  good  friend,    who  said,    "We  supported 
you.    Sally,   when  you  worked  for  Amnesty   International,   but  now 
that  you're   talking  about    peace,    you're  off   the  wall."     It's  a 
left-wing  cause,    and  it   certainly  was   in  those   days.      It's  much 
less  so  today. 

Morris:        Because   of   the  economic  implications? 

Sally  L:     Well,    you  know,    what's  a  peace   activist  look  like.      He  has 

sandals,    has  long  hair,    and  lives  in  Berkeley,    and  used  to  hang 
out  at  Sather  Gate. 

Morris:        Well,    reading  over  the  annual    reports  and  looking  at  the  board 

list  and  things  like  that,    I  was   struck  by   the  number  of  admirals 
and   general*.      Military  people   are  generally  considered 
conservative.      They    used   to   be   apolitical. 


Ill 


Sally  L:      Definitely.  But  when  we  started — let  me  go  back.      So  how   are  we   going 
to  start   this   thing?      The  people  in  the  East   say.    "Fine,    go  ahead." 
And  we  weren't  looking  for  money.      We  were  just  asking  them  what  they 
thought  of   this.      And  we  asked  a  few  places  like,    oh,    environmental 
places  that  we  knew.      Oh,    I  know.    Russ  Peterson,   who  was  at  the  time 
the  head  of   the  Audubon  Society.      Russ  has  always  been  interested  in 
nuclear  issues.     He  had  been  the   governor  of  Delaware,   and  I  knew  him 
very  well  because  we  worked  together  in  something  called  New  Direc 
tions  years   before.      Anyhow,    everybody   said,    "Go  ahead."     I   mean,   why 
not? 


So  then,  the  next  thing  was,   I  had  to  get  a  board,  of  course. 
How   do  we  get  a  board  except  by   phoning  our  friends,    who  are — 
They   had  to  be  people  who  knew   something  about  the  subject.      And 
so,  we  knew  Owen  Chamberlain,  and  we  could  get  Owen,  and  we  knew 
Jack  Service  very  well   indeed.      We  could  get  Jack. 

Morris:        Had  you  worked  with  Jack? 

Sally  L:     No.      Phil   and  Jack  were  old  friends,    and  I  was  an  old  friend  of 
Jack's  too.      Actually   this  is  not  his  field,   but   diplomacy  is. 

Morris:       In  the  proper  role  of  goverment? 

Sally  L:      In  the  proper  role  of   government.     Had  been  improperly  used  in  his 
case.      So  those  were  very  good  people. 

Morris:       Who's  Albert  Jonsen? 

Sally  L:     Albert  Jonsen  is  a  medical   ethicist,    and  he  did  not  stay  on  the 

board  long.      He  was  just  a  very   smart  man  with  international   inter 
ests,    whOjby  the  way,  had  been  a  Jesuit  priest  and  at  one  time  had 
been  the  head  of   the  University   of  San  Francisco  and  later   gave  up 
the  priesthood  to  marry   a  beautiful  girl.      He  was  just  somebody   who — 

Morris:        That's  another  whole  earth-shaking  subject.      And  Brenda  Brimmer? 

Sally  L:     And  Brenda  Brimmer  came  on  later.      That  was  a  suggestion  of 

Bill's.      She  had  run  a  foundation.      She  was   the  first   director   of 
Ms.    Foundation.      She  was  interested  in  these   subjects.      She  had 
worked  for  the  UNA   [United  Nations  Association].      She  was 
suggested  because  we  needed  a  board  member  from  the  east.      She 
didn't  j  oin  the  board  for  a  year  and  a  half  or  so,   I  think.     Bill 
knew   her  well  because  he  had  done  a  job  in  South  Africa  with  her. 
She  was  a  business  woman  by   the   time. 

Among  the  first  board  members  was  a  woman  whose  name  was  Pat 
DiGiorgio,  and  Pat  I  knew.     Her  involvement  was   deep  with  the  UN, 
and  she  resigned  because  her  whole  involvement  was  raising  money 
for  a  library  for  the  UN  here  in  San  Francisco.      So  some   of   the 
first  board  members  were  people  who  started  it  out. 


112 


Morris:       On  the  organizing  papers? 

Sally  L:      Yes,   and  came   to  the  meetings,   but   for  one   reason  or  another 

didn't  work  out  after  a  while.      For  instance,    it  turned  out  John 
May   did  not  want  to  raise  any   money,    although  he  said  he  would, 
originally.     That  was   the  main  thing  he   could  do  for  us,  since  he 
was  not  a   specialist  on  international   subjects.     A  few    instances 
like   that,   you  know.      And  so.    what   I'm   saying  is,  it  narrowed  down. 
Al  went  to  Oxford  for  the  year,    so  he  was  no  help. 


A  Public  Foundation;    Initial   Support  and  Staff 


Morris:       What  did  the  Internal  Revenue  Service  think? 

Sally  L:     Fine.      Tom   Silk  went  through   the  papers — no  problem. 

Morris:        Nobody  questioned  you  about  being  a  progressive,   left-wing  outfit? 

Sally  L:     No.      Then,    of  course,    there  are  all   these  other  things  which  I 

didn't  know  until   I  went  to  Tom   Silk,    whom  I  had  known  for  years, 
and  asked  him  to  put   this   thing  together.      Who  said,    of   course,    as 
a  public  foundation,   you  can  give  20  percent  of  your  entire  budget 
for  lobbying,  .unlike  a  private  foundation. 

Morris:        So  that's  why  you  picked  that? 

Sally  L:     No,   because  it  had  to  be  a  public  foundation.     The  whole  point  was 
that  it  was  a  public  foundation.     Because  there  are  very  few 
public  foundations  in  this   country,    as  you  know,    of   that  kind, 
public  foundations   that  make   grants.      No  models  at   that   time,    I'm 
told,   and  now    I've  gone  to  enough  foundation  meetings   to  know    that 
there  are  few  foundations  with  only  one  purpose:      that  only   give 
to  Jewish   causes,    for  instance,    or  only   to  music.      Most   of    them 
would  be  like  Tides  and  Vanguard.      That  is  they  are  partially  or 
principally  funding  agents  for  donor-oriented  philanthrophy. 

Are  you  familiar  with  Tides  at  all? 
Morris:        It  rings  a  bell,   but — 

Sally  L:      Tides  works,    in  a  way,    like  a  community  foundation.      The  way  it 
runs  is   because   people,    individuals,    give   their  money,    give   a 
block  of   stock,    and  the  foundation  takes   care  of   spending  it.      It 
manages  it.      It's   a  managing  foundation. 

Morris:        It   doesn't  develop  an  endowment? 


113 


Sally  L: 


Morris : 
Sally  L: 

Morris: 

Sally  L: 
Morris : 

Sally  L: 
Morris: 
Sally  L: 


Oh,    no,    no,    not  an  endowment  at  all.      Let's   say   I  want  to   give 
$50,000   a  year   to  charity.      I'd   give   the   $50,000   when  financially 
it's  a  good  time  for  me  to   give  it,    and   I  want  to   give  money  to 
the  community   chest  and  the  music  school  as  well  as  to  other 
institutions.     And   there  are  those  who  want  to   give  it  only  to  the 
environment,    and  would  you  please   counsel  us  on  how  best  to  give 
it  to  the  environment.      So   they  hire  somebody  to  look  into  how 
best  to  give  money   to  environmental   programs.      But  Tides  is  a  very 
different  kind  of   a  foundation,    and  quite  unique,    and  very 
successful,    and  run  by  my   son-in-law,   by   the  way. 

From  your  example? 

Oh,    my   goodness,    no.      He   started  it  before  Ploughshares.      Heavens 
no. 

In  going  around  and  talking  to  all   these  people*  were  you  in  a 
sense  seeking  counsel  about  how   to  get  other  people  to  put  money 
into  peace  and  alternative  security  and  things  like  that? 

Yes,    that's   the  purpose  of   it.      The  purpose   of   the   foundation  was 
two-fold.      Sure,    to  get  people  to  put  their  money   into — 

By  the  time  you  went  around  talking  to  various  people,   you  already 
preferred  a  foundation  rather  than  alternative  ways  of  getting 
money   to  projects  for  the  prevention  of  nuclear  war? 


Well,    there  was  no  alternative  way. 
else  but  a  foundation. 


We  never  thought  of  anything 


You  said  you  were  already   in  touch  with  various  organizations  that 
were  working  in  the  field. 

Oh,   yes,    but  we  were  talking,    for  instance,    about  the  Center  for 
Defense  Information.      For  a  few  years  it's   done   great  work,    but 
for  years  before  that  it  didn't  do  great  work.      We  as  Ploughshares 
never  gave  until   this  year  money  to  the   Center  for  Defense 
Information.      It  has  a  million  dollars  in  the  bank  every  year;   it 
made   so  much  money  that  it   didn't  need  our  money.      But  you   don't 
know    that  when  you  get  a  letter  from  the  center  or  from   all  those 
other   centers  or   councils  or   coalitions. 

You  know   how    it  is  in  any  of  these  things — leave  out  what  the 
purpose   of   it  is.     You  have  to  look  in  and  see  what   the  administra 
tion  is.      Let's   say,    for  example,    there  is  an  organization  that  is 
stony  broke  and  still   it's    got  forty   people   on   staff  and  you   don't 
know   what  the  specific  program   is.      I  know  one  in  the  peace  field 
right  now   that  fits   this   description  to  a  T.      It's  up   to   a  founda 
tion   to  research   these   things.      Isn't   that   right?      That's   the   purpose 
of   a  foundation,    I   think,    to  find  out,    to  do  the  research  to  see 
that   an  organization  is  not  only  effective,    but   is  also  well-run. 


114 


Morris:        Yes,    and  develop  some   standards  from   the  foundation's  point  of 
view. 

Sally  L:     Sure,    every  time  you  give  a  grant  you  have  to  look  and  see  what 
the  expenditures  are,    how   it's  administered,    and  whether  it's 
effective. 

Morris:       Did  you  start  out  with  some  pledges  of   some  money — 

Sally  L:     No.    except  for  me.     No.      I  think  Bill  must  have  given  to  us 

immediately.     A  few   old  friends   gave  some  money.     Of   course,    there 
was  no  overhead,    because  it  was  just  me.      I  think  there  was  no 
overhead  at  all.      And   I'm   sure   I   didn't  keep  books   that  first  year 
about   paying  for  stationery,    letterhead,    or  anything.      It  was  run 
out  of  my   study. 

Morris:        On  your  own  personal   stationery? 

Sally  L:     No.  no.   I  think  I  had  stationery,  but  I  paid  for  it.     It  was  a 

great  board,    though,   because  they  were  interested,   and  I  had  told 
them   they   didn't  have  to  go  out  and  raise  money.     That  was  my  job 
from  the  first.      Otherwise  these  busy   people  would  not  have  been 
involved  and  supportive. 

Morris:        In  the  first  annual   report  you  put  out  you  said  that  the  board 
spent   six  months  talking  about  how   to  proceed  and — 

Sally  L:     That's  right.      Then  we  met  three  times  in  the  next  six  months. 

Yes,    we   decided  to  iron  things  out.      I   don't  know    that  everything 
happened   in  the  first   six  months.      But,    for  instance,    there  were 
two  things  in    that    first  year  and  a  half   that   definitely  were 
decided.      Coming  from   a  background  of  human  rights,!  wanted  to 
give  money  toward  human-rights  activities,    although  I  very 
definitely  today   think  that  I  was  wrong.      We  did  give  some  human- 
rights   grants.      In  fact  our  first   grants  were  in  that  area.      But   I 
think  I'm  wrong. 

Morris:       Why? 

Sally  L:      I  think  we  should  just   stick  with  the  prevention  of  nuclear  war. 
But  for  that  first  year  and  a  half.    I  lobbied  the  board  to  see  if 
we   couldn't  give  human-rights   grants,    and  if  we  couldn't  give 
grants  in  Central  America  to  prevent   conflict  in  Central  America. 
In  both  cases,    I  was  voted  down,   which  I  think  was   correct. 

Morris:        So  you're  lobbying  your  board? 
Sally  L:     Yes. 

Morris:        And   the   organization   didn't  listen  to  you.      They,  gave  you  a  hard 
time? 


115 


Sally  L:      I   couldn't   really  argue   that  we  had  the  expertise   to  decide   on 

grants  on  Central  America.      It  was  important  to  stick  with  what  we 
knew   how    to  do,    and  difficult   enough   as   it  was. 

Morris:        Okay,    so  how  long  did  you  operate  that  way  before  you  decided  you 
really  needed  a   staff  person? 

Sally  L:      Maybe   only   a  year.      I   did  have   some  staff  help.      Well,    I  had  a 

part-time   assistant.      I   first  realized  I  needed  a   secretary   part- 
time.      Well,   very  part-time  because  I  was   still   running  the 
gallery. 

Morris:        Right.      And  you're  still  doing  Amnesty   things   too? 

Sally  L:      No,   no,   no.      I  hadn't  for  years.      I  think  it  was  a  year  until  we 
got  this  extraordinary   executive  director. 

Morris:        You  found  him  on  the  east   coast? 
Sally  L:     No,    it's  a   "her". 


More   on  Advisers  and  Their  Role 


Sally  L: 


Morris : 
Sally  Li 


I've  left  out  one  element  out  of   this,    which  was  very   important. 
When  I  was   in  New   York  for  that  first  Yacht  Club  meeting,    I  had   (I 
think  it  was  then)  an  appointment  with  David  Hunter   the  next   day   to 
give  me   further  advice. 

"We've  got  the  board,    David,    now   what  do  we   do?"  because 
David  was,    as   I   say,    sort   of   a  father  figure  in  this  area.      There 
were  these  men  from    foundations  in  different  parts  of   the  country 
sitting  around  in  his  office,   you  know,    before   they   took   their 

planes  to   go  back  to  Flint,    Michigan,    or  whatever.       [laughs]      I 
thought   I  was   going  to  have  a  meeting  just  with  David. 


"What  do  we  do  now?"      [laughs] 
"Get  yourselves   some  advisers." 


And  one   of   these  men  said, 


And  I   said,    "Who  do  you  suggest?"     And  they   said,    "Ha,    ha." 
They   didn1 t   think  you  were — 

Although   they   said  they   were  feminists,    they  weren't  when  it  comes 
down  to  running  a  foundation.      They   said,    "Get  yourself  George 
Kennan."     Everyone   laughed   because   it   was    saying  "get  the 


116 


Sally  L:      impossible."     Of   course  George  Kennan  is   the   big  name   in   this 
field,    or  was   at   the  time.      And  it  happened  that   I   had  an 
appointment  with  George  Kennan  that  very   day. 

Morris:        You  already   had  an  appointment  with — 

Sally  L:      I  already  had  an  appointment   to   see  George  Kennan.      So  David  still 
tells   to  this   day     how    I  was  able   to  arrange   it.      It  was   not   true. 
and  he  knows   it.      I  mean.    I  had  arranged  it   before   I  asked  him. 
And  George  Kennan  became  our  first  adviser.      So  when  he   thought  it 
was  a  great  idea,  oh,    I  was  thrilled. 

Morris:        Your  list  of   advisers   is  very   impressive. 

Sally  L:      And,    of  course,    after  George  Kennan — well,    a  lot  of   those   came  in 
later  over   the  years.      We   cut   out  a  lot  of   people   I   got  in  the 
first  place. 

Morris:        This   is   the  list  as  it  was  published  in  the  f oundations's  first 
report. 

Sally  L:     And  it  was  published  in  the  first  place. 

Morris:        So  there  probably  had  been  a  little  shuffling  around. 

Sally  L:     Yes.     Oh,  there's  been  a  lot,  yes.     Oh,   I  mean  there's  shuffling 
around  now.      Every   time   there's  nothing  to  do  around  here,    we 
improve   the  list.      But  know  we  can  get  anybody — 

Morris:        Yes,    now   it's  probably   a  mark  of  honox — 

Sally  L:     Well,    I   don't  know    if   it's   honor,    but — I'm   pretty    thrilled.      I 

went  to  the  capitol  for  a  luncheon  meeting  that   somebody   took  me 
to  a   couple  of  weeks   ago,   just  for   senators  and  congressmen  to 
meet  the  ambassadors  from  Costa  Rica,    and  El   Salvador.      My  friend 
introduced  me   to  a  lot  of   people.      And  they   said,    "Are  you  the 
Sally  Lilienthal  from   the   Ploughshares   Fund?"     And   that  was   pretty 
exciting.       So   that's  very  different   than  it  was   in  the  first 
place. 

Morris:        One  of  your  advisers  was  Edie  Willkie? 

Sally  L:     Yes,    do  you  know  her? 

Morris:        Is   that  Wendell  Willkie' s  widow? 

Sally  L:     No,    she's  a  marvelous  woman  who  runs  something  called  Members  of 
Congress   for  Peace   Through  Law.    which  is  an  organization  which 
educates   congresspersons  on  international   issues,    and  also   does 
some   organizing,    and  helping  to  get — though   they're  not  lobbyists — 
people  who   can   give  information   to  lobbyists.      For  instance,    to   try 


117 


Sally  L:      and  improve  international   relationships.      She  happens   to  be  a  grantee 
of   ours.      I  went  to  the  summit  with  her  last  year;   Reykjavik.      She's 
a  grantee  because   she  puts  on  something  called  a  Round  Table,   at 
which  particularly  junior  congressmen  come  something  like  eight 
times  a  year  to  what   she  promises  is  a  very   good  dinner.      They  are 
invited  to  bring  their  wives.      And  there  they   learn  about  Soviet 
and  arms   control   issues,  which  they,   particularly  young 
congressmen,    haven't  a   clue   about.      We  give  her  a  grant  for  that. 

Morris:        I  recently  became  aware  of  that  organization  in  talking  with  a 
former  congressman.      He  described  it  as  kind  of   a  support  group. 

Sally  L:     That's  interesting. 

Morris:        Well,    I  was  startled  that  a  congressman  normally  only  has  two 

committee  assignments,    and  otherwise  is  indeed  sort  of  out  in  a 
large   ocean  not  knowing — 

Sally  L:     What's   going  on,   yes. 
Morris:       — about  the  rest  of   the — 

Sally  L:     Although  he  votes   and  he   doesn't  know,    yes.      It's  a  very  useful 
thing.      It's  very  useful. 

Morris :        How   long  has  it  been? 

Sally  L:      I   don't  know.      I  used  to  support  it  for  years,    before  Edie  took  it 
on.      But  this  Round  Table   thing  that   she   does,    I  think  we've  just 
supported  for   the   third  year;    I   think  it's  only  the  third  that 
she's    done   it.       It's    growing  enormously.      She's   Don  Edwards'   wife, 
by   the  way.      You  know,    Don  Edwards  who  is  the  wonderful 
congressman  from  San  Jose  who  is  particularly  involved  with  civil- 
rights  issues.      She's  wonderful,    fabulous. 

Oh,    I  brought  that  up  to  say   that  things  have   changed.      But 
that  helped  us  a  lot,    having  George  Kennan. 

Morris:        Once  it  had  been  suggested  that  you  have  advisers,  what  kind  of   a 
role  did  you  see  for  them,    or  did  you  just  go  and  pick  their 
brains  individually? 

Sally  L:     Well,    I  think  that  we  hoped  they'd  be   on  the  side   of   the 

stationery.      In  fact,    George  Kennan  did  really  become   an  adviser. 
Marshall  Shulman,    who  was  head  of  the  Harriman  School   (who  Bill 
got  for  us),   who  was   Carter's   Soviet  adviser  and,    again,    one   of 
the   top  five   people  in  the  country.      I  could   call  him  for  advice. 
We  don't  need  to  any   more  because  we've   got  our  own  in-house 
Soviet   adviser.      Squidge  Lee,    Admiral  John  F.   Lee,    called 
"Squidge, "  is   definitely   an  adviser,    particularly   for   conventional 
weapons.      Some  of   them  are  advisers,    and  most  of   them — 


118 


Morris:        On  the  technical   aspects? 

Sally  L:     When  they   needed  to  be.      I  haven't  done   it  for  a  long  time,   but 
Squidge  I  have  talked  to  about  what  he  thinks  about  the  build-up 
of   conventional   weapons  in  Europe.      Not  on  a  particular  project   as 
I  can  remember,   but  often  something  on  the  policy   of   the  United 
States,   which  influences  one's   grants. 

Morris:        In  terms   of  a  specific  applicant? 

Sally  L:     Very   definitely  we  could  ask,    and  I've  certainly  asked  George 

often  and  I've  asked  Marshall   too.     George   sometimes  writes   us  and 
tells   us  about  a  project   in  which  he  has  an  interest,    or  sometimes 
about  one  that  doesn't  think  we   should   support.      Or  somebody   is 
sending  in  a  person  he  knows,    and  he  doesn't  think  he's  doing  such 
a  good  job  at  such-at-such.      He   doesn't   do  that  very   much  any 
more,    because  he's  very  old. 

I  happen  to  have  gotten  to  know   him  becuase  he  lives  in 
Princeton,    and  I've  been  in  Princeton  quite   often,  mostly  because   I 
visit  the  Roths,   but  also  we  have  a  big  support  group  in 
Princeton.     Well,    not  so  very  big,    but  a  very   generous  support 
group  in  Princeton,    so  I  go  there  quite  often. 

Morris :        How  about   the  head  of   the  League   of  Women  Voters? 

Sally  L:     Ruth  Hinerfeld.      Pat  DiGiorgio  got  her  for  us  because  she  was  on 
the  UNA   [United  Nations  Association]    board.      I   did  not  meet  Ruth 
Hinerfeld  until   a  year  ago,    and  I've  just   seen  her  again,    and  now 
she's  going  to  give  a  dinner  party  for  us  in  Westchester. 

Morris:        So  that  that's  a  good  working  relationship? 

Sally  L:      Yes.      Some   of   them  are  and  some   of   them  aren't.      Harrison 

Salisbury,  who  Jack  Service   got  for   us,   has  been  as   grumpy   as  he 
could  be.      When  we  had  lunch  a  year  or  so  ago,    I   could  have  kicked 
him.      He  is  there  for  his  name. 

Morris:        And  Joan  and  Erik  Erikson.      Those  are  names  to  conjure  with. 

Sally  L:     Well,   yes,    those  are  names  to  conjure  with.     Erik  is  too  old, 

really.      They  were  put  on  because  they're  very   interested  in  these 
things.      Joan  is  particularly  so.      Well,    Erik  is   too.      I   mean. 
they've  got  a  long  history  of   being  interested  in   peace,    and  Joan 
has   been  helpful.      Now    that  is  all   over,    because   they   don't  live 
here  any   more,    but   they   used  to.      Some   people   do  things  for  us,    or 
would  do   things   for  us  if  we  asked  them. 

Morris :        Marj  orie  Benton? 


119 


Sally  L:      Marjorie  Benton  definitely  does  things  for  us.      She   comes  from 

Chicago.       She's   an  enormous  fundraiser  for  this  and  other  issues — 
environmental  issues,   women's  issues.      She  is   the  American 
delegate   to  UNICEF.    or  no.    I'm  not  sure  that  it's  UNICEF  or — 
[pauses].      Well.    UNICEF  will   do.      She's  sort  of  one  of   those 
national-figure   type   persons.      She's  married  to  Charles  Benton.    of 
Benton  and  Bowles,    Encyclopedia  Brittanica.      And  she  is  very 
helpful   to  us  when  we  go   to  Chicago.      I  didn't  know   her  in  the 
first   place.      David  Hunter  suggested  that  I   get  her. 

Morris:        Because  he  knew   that   she  was  interested  in  pushing  for  peace? 

Sally  L:      Yes.      It's  such  a  small   community.   Gabrielle,   you  can   get  to  know 
all   the  people  in  the  field. 

Morris:        I  can  believe  it.     When  did  Adrian  DeWind  become  an  adviser? 

Sally  L:      Oh,    yes,    he  immediately  became  an  adviser  that  moment,    as  soon  as 
we  existed.      He's  been  very,    very  helpful.      He  runs  an  enormous 
organization,    NRDC    [Natural   Resources  Defense   Council],    to  which 
we've  given  one  of  our  largest  grants. 

Morris:        How   about   dark  Kerr? 

Sally  L:     Bill   asked  him.      I've  never  met  Clark  Kerr.      We  asked  him — and  we 
thanked  him  for  his  service.      I've  never  met  him. 

Morris:        So  you  never  convened  all   the  advisers  together? 

Sally  L:     No,    they're  like  most  advisers.      Some   of   them  are  very   definitely 

helpful.      Jerry   Smith,    who's  a  new   adviser,    is  ambassador  to  SALT  I 
[Strategic  Arms  Limitation  Talks],    one  of  the  eminent  negotiators 
on  the  ABM    [Anti-Ballistic  Missile]    Treaty.     He  belongs   to  the  so- 
called  Gang  of  Four — [Robert]   McNamara,   Jerry  Smith,    George 
Kennan,    and  George  Bundy.      Anyway,  Jerry   Smith  is  one  of   those 
very,   very  top  people,    and  he  is   certainly  very  helpful   to   us.      He 
just   came  up  from  Washington  and  spoke  for  us  in  New  York.      He 
gives   us  money — that's   good.      He  writes  me  nice  letters   all   the 
time — he's  terrific. 

Morris:       When  were  you  ready  to   consider  applications? 

Sally  L:      Immediately.      I   guess  I  was  thrilled  when  we  got  applications,    but 
it  is  amazing  how  word  gets  around.      And  how   it   did,    I   don't  know. 
I  noticed  you  had  this  question  here  and  I   scratched  my  head  and 
wondered  about  it.      Maybe  at  that  first  meeting  that   I  went  to? 
Maybe  David  Hunter  said    [to  somebody],    "Why   don't  you  apply  to 
these   people?" 

Morris:        First  you're   an  ad  hoc  group,    and  then  your  board  had  been 
discussing  the  idea  for  a  year  or  so? 


120 


Sally  L:     Before  we   started?      No,    I   don't  even  think  that  long.      No.    I 

think  maybe   six  months.      Six  months,    right.      And  we  were  nowhere 
six  months  before.      It  worked  quite  fast.      I   think   I  had  the  idea 
a  few    months,    perhaps  talked  to  somebody  over  some  drinks  or 
something,   but  not — 


121 


XI  DEVELOPING  GRANTS  POLICIES 


Considering  Applications 


Morris:   And  so  by  the  time  you  had  your  first  board  meetings  you  already 
had  some  applications  from  people  requesting  grants? 

Sally  L:  Yes,  yes.  Yes,  sure. 

Morris:   Oh,  that  must  have  been  very  exciting. 

Sally  L:  It's  interesting,  some  of  those  early  grants.   Of  course,  our 
policy  wasn't  formed,  as  I  say.   Some  of  these  grants  were  not 
big;  they  were  tiny  grants  and  were  unrelated  to  what  we  do  today. 
I  remember  one  of  them  was  to  study  what  was  happening  in  Cuba. 
That  was  because  David  Hunter  asked  me  to  go  to  Cuba  with  him  and 
some  other  people,  the  summer  before  we  started  Ploughshares.   I 
was  really  interested  in  Cuba.   I  thought  it  was  ridiculous  that 
we  should  be — 

Morris:   Not  speaking. 

Sally  L:  Not  speaking.   Well,  Cuba  was  eager  to  speak  to  us  and  give  up 
Russia  and  take  on  the  United  States  as  a  trading  partner  again. 

Morris:   Was  that  the  sense  of  your  experience? 

Sally  L:  Definitely,  in  a  very — nutshell  way — yes.   It  certainly  was.   Of 
course,  there  are  all  kinds  of  immense  problems,  and  economically 
as  you  know  yourself,  it's  not  much  better  today  than  it  was  six 
years  ago.   Definitely,  I  think  it  is  still  true. 

Morris:   Was  there  a  way  in  which  you  could  include  Cuba  under  a  policy  of 
alternate  ways  of  settling  disputes? 

Sally  L:  We  couldn't,  you  see.   We  wouldn't  do  that  today.   At  that  time, 

we  all  came  back  from  the  trip,  especially  the  businessmen,  saying 
at  the  Miami  airport,  "Now  what  should  each  of  us  do  for  Cuba?" 


122 


Sally  L:      Or  not  for  Cuba,    per   se.    but   do  something  "about  improving  the 

situation  in  this  country.'  What  are  we  going  to  do?"  So  I  went 
home,  and  I  made  a  grant  to  an  expert  journalist  who  had  written 
me  wanting  to  do  a  story  to  do  about  Cuba. 

We  wouldn't  do  that  today  because  it's  outside  our 
guidelines.      But  when  we  first  started,    we  weren't  that  specific 
that  it  would  only  be  for  prevention  of  nuclear  war,   exactly   that, 
not  other  international  problems.      There  is  a  relationship,    of 
course,   between  relations  in  Cuba  and  nuclear  war,   but  I'm  very 
glad  that  the  board  made   that  decision.      I  think  it  makes  a  lot  of 
sense. 

I  think  it  was  a  good  decision  of   the  board  to  narrow   the 
focus.      Two  of   them  in  particular,    three   of   them  in  particular 
knew   the  foundation  world  so  well,   which   I  did  not.      If  you  do, 
you  know  how   trendy   it  is  and  how   the  foundation  will   give — 

Morris:       There  is  a  suspicion,   but  not  too  many  people  say  so. 

Sally  L:     How   could  that  be?      I  see  it.      If  they  go  to  Council  on 

Foundations  meetings,    they  can't  help  but  see  it.      Well,    really  I 
don't  know  what  foundations  you've  talked  to,    but — in  San 
Francisco   there  are  marvelous  foundations.      I  don't  know    if  all 
foundations  are,   but  I   think  some  of   them  are  just  remarkable. 
But   it  is  amazing;    if  you've  ever  gone  to  a  Council   on  Foundations 
meeting  it  would  be  an  eye-opener. 

I  couldn't  believe  it  when  Tom   and  Susan  and  all  told  me 
about — and  it  certainly   is  true — the  arrogance   of   some  foundation 
people,    who  are  giving  away — not  their  own  money  after  all — 
they're  giving  away  money  of  others,    and  they  take  on  the   persona, 
you  know,    of   the  philanthropist   or  the  corporation  which  provides 
the  capital. 

One  of   the  things   about  making  this  foundation,    as  a 
foundation,   was   the   great  benefit,    the  enormous  benefit   of  having 
Lew   and  Tom,    and  Susan  at  the  start,    but  Lew   and  Tom  and  Bill  who 
really  know  foundation  work  and  know  enough,   and  know   the 
legalities  and  the  pitfalls  of   it   to  make  this —     In  certain  ways 
it  is  an  exemplary  foundation,    in  all  kinds   of  ways   I  would  not 
have  thought  of. 

You  know,    many   foundations,    if  you  write  for  a  grant,   you 
don't  know  whether  you'll   get  an  answer.      When  the   distribution 
committee  has  a  meeting,    the  prospect   isn't  told  whether  he  gets  a 
grant  or  not,    and  on  and  on  and  on.      At   this  foundation  we   see 
everybody    that's   got  a   project  anywhere   close   to  what  we're 
interested  in,    even  if  we  know   they're — 

Morris:        You  do   try   and  see  most  of   the  people—? 


123 


Sally  L:     We  really   do.      We  really   do.      And  after  a  distribution  meeting, 
immediately   that  very  day.    we  tell  people  whether  they  get  the 
grants   or  not. 


Accessibility;    International  and   Individual  Grants 

Morris:        That's  very   civil. 

Sally  L:     We  do   make   a  special    effort  to  be  considerate.      Because  we  give 
away  the  money  and  raise  the  money  to   give  it  away,    we're  not 
better   than  the  people  who  come  to  ask  for  it.      But  you  don't  get 
that  feeling  when  you  go  to  foundations,  mostly.       But   perhaps   the 
major   thing  that  the  founding  directors   did  was  to  fashion  a 
foundation  with  flexibility. 

I  wouldn't  have  known  that  certain  limitations  are  somewhat 
traditional   in  the   private   sector.      For  instance,     there's   no  legal 
reason   why    every    foundation  can't   give   grants   outside    the  U.S., 
but  many    don't.      Ploughshares  has  no   geographical   limitations. 
There's   no  reason  that   a   foundation  can't   give   grants  to 
individuals.      We   pride  ourselves  on  supporting  individuals.      And 
it's  a  very   important  thing  that  we  do.      We  give  grants  to 
individuals  sometimes  just  for  doing  a  good  job  that  we   think  is 
important.      Sometimes   these  have  turned  out  to  be  our  most 
important   grants.      We  really  measure   the  successes. 

Morris:        How   do  you  deal  with  the  expenditure-responsibility   requirement? 
Sally  L:      They  have  to   send  us   a  report. 
Morris:        And  individuals  are  not   tax  exempt. 

Sally  L:     No,    I  know.      They  have  to  pay   their  income   tax  on  the   grant  unless 
they   are  hired  by  us   to  do  a   specific  project  as  a   consultant. 

Morris:       But  otherwise  an  individual   grantee  has  to  pay   a  regular  income 
tax  on  the  money  you  give  him  or  her? 

Sally  L:     Yes. 

Morris:        Has   that  ever  boomeranged? 

Sally  L:     Well,    if   they   don't  want  a  grant   on  which   they  have   to  pay   taxes, 
they   don't  have  to  take  it. 

Morris:        No,    but    I  meant  that,    reading  the  literature,    the  don't-give-to- 

individuals  policy  seems  to  come  from  some  thought  that  somehow  an 
individual  might  use  the  money  on  either  living,  and  not  do  an  in- 
depth  study  of  whatever. 


124 


Sally  L:     Well,    I   guess   that  these   three   people  on  our  board   that   I  talk 

about   particularly,    who  knew   so  much  about  foundations,    say   that 
if  half   the   grants   pay   off — like  psychiatrists  talking  about 
analysis — we're   doing  well.      I    don't   think   that's    true.      That's 
what  Tom  would  say.   but  I  think  the  percentage  is  much  higher   than 
that.      I   think  in  the  time  we've  been  in  business,    which   is  only 
six  years.    I  can  only   think  of   two  instances  where   the   grants  have 
not   been  used  for  what  the  person  said  they'd  be   used  for.      By  the 
way.    in  neither  of   these   two   cases   did   the   grant   go  to  individuals. 

Every    individual    grant  we've   given  has   really   paid  off.      It's 
unfortunate  that  one  scientist  who  left  his   university  post  to 
work  on  something  on  his  own  did  not.    as  expected,    get  a  job  at  an 
institution,    so  he   couldn't   carry  on  his   research.      So  his 
research   really   stopped  at  the  $10,000   we  gave  him.      So  in  that 
sense   sometimes,    they've   been   disappointing,    in  that  what   is  a 
seed   grant  hasn't  grown.      But   other  than  that.    I  can't  remember  an 
individual   grant  that  we've  given  that's  not  been  really  useful. 

Morris:        You  mentioned  that  a  couple  have  been  used  for  something  else. 

Was  it  something  that  the  board  felt  was  really  out   of  bounds   or 
was  it  just  that  the  proposal  as  written,    when  it  came  to  carry  it 
out,    didn't  work  out? 

Sally  L:     They  used  it  for  something  else.      Apparently  that  happens  quite 
often  with  foundations'   grants.      I  don't  know. 

We've  also  gotten  money  back  from   an  organization,    I   think 
twice.      Once  where   they'd  wanted  to   do  a   slide   show.      They  just 
never  got  the  personnel    together,   and  some  other  crisis   came  up, 
and  they  didn't  make   the   slide   show,   so  they   gave  us   the  money 
back,    or   they   said  they   would  send  the  money   back.      And  we   said, 
because   the   organization  is   good   (I'm   thinking   of   one   in 
particular)  because  it's  a  very,    very  good  organization,    which  we 
wanted  to  help   develop,    we   said  then.    "Well,    let's   give  it  to  you 
for  general   purposes. " 

I   don't  mean  all  of   these   programs  have  had  as  much  impact  as 
I'd  like,    but  the  grantees  use  the  money  the  way  they  said  they 
would.      Individuals  have  been  absolutely   fantastic.      We've  given 
some  such  interesting  grants   that  have  really   paid   off.      Last 
year,    for  instance,    we  gave  a  grant   to  a  woman  who  is  in  herself. 
not  only   through  her  work,   such  an  inspiration,   such  a  role  model 
for   others.      I   don't  mean  to  say   that  in  any   sort  of  vague  way; 
she  is  a  very   practical   person  as  well  as   a  visionary  one.      Her 
speaking  is  so  wonderful.      But  we  don't  give  grants  nowadays  for 
the  kind   of   things   she   does.      She  puts  together   trips  up  mountains 
for  Soviet  and  American  young  people,    hiking  together. 


125 


Sally  L:     We  do   give  a  lot,   about   20   percent   of  our  money,    to  Soviet- 
American  communication,    but   usually  not  to  that  kind  of  citizen-to- 
citizen   so-called  "diplomacy."     Cynthia  Lazaroff  was  our   grantee 
that   I'm   talking  about.      (There's  a  wonderful,    wonderful    film 
that's  been   shown  everywhere,    including  the  White  House,   about  her 
mountain  adventures.)        She  has  developed  a  useful,    small 
organization  that  advises  many  people  and  institutions  on  how   to 
make   Soviet  trips  that  count.     Last  year,    she  was  just   down  on  her 
luck.      She  looked  hungry  and  I  knew    she  was  out   of  money.      So  we 
gave  her  a  grant.     There's  no  reason  not  to  do  that. 

I'd   say   in  two  cases  we  have   said  to  the   grantee,   you  have  to 
spend  $1000  of   this   going  East   to  raise  money   from   foundations 
there.      They've    done  it,    and   it's  worked.      In   both   cases,    you   see. 
the  grantees  came  from   California,   which  is  somewhat  unusual   for 
Ploughshares. 

Morris:        They  brought  home  new   funding? 

Sally  L:     Yes.     But   originally  they  hadn't  wanted  to  spend  the  little  money 
they   had  for   their  organization  on  taking  a   trip  East. 

Morris:        Is  your  experience   that  there's  more  money  to  be  raised  in  the 
East  than  there  is  out  West? 

Sally  L:     Oh,    yes.      Oh,    sure.      Then  there  are  things  like    this    [chuckles]. 

This  was  Wayne    [Jaquith]'s*  decision  about  one   of   the   generals  you 
mentioned   (I   can't  even  remember  his  name)   who  talks   on  Star  Wars. 
Wayne  heard  him  speak  and  thought  what  he  had  to   say  was  very 
important.      And  he  was  a  multi-starred  general,    from   the  South 
besides.      That's   the  area  in  which  he  tours.      He   talks   so   badly 
that  Wayne   said  the  general    ought  to  spend  $1000  of   our  grant 
taking  speaking  lessons. 

Morris:        That's  very   brave. 

Sally  L:     Well,   he  did.     Wayne  is  marvelous — telling  people  things  like 
that.      I  wouldn't  know  how  to   say   it.      Would  you? 

Morris:        No.      I've  often  thought  that  I  would  like   to  take   a  course   in  how    to 
say   important   things  tactfully. 

Sally  L:  If  you  ever  find  it,   would  you  let  me  know? 

Morris:  Why   don't  we   stop   there  for  today. 

Sally  L:  Good.      I  think  I   run  on  and  on. 

Morris:  You  do  tell  a  story  very  well.      I  don't  think  you  go  on  and  on. 


*Then  Ploughshares   executive  director. 


126 

Working  with  Other  Foundations 
[Interview  5:      November  12,    1987 ]## 


Sally  L:     Have  you  ever  gone   to  a  Council   on  Foundations  meeting? 
Morris:        I  have  not  had  the  honor,    but  it  would  be  fascinating. 

Sally  L:     Well,   they  are  usually  not  that  interesting  because  the  panels  are 
often  filled  with  bureaucatic  speeches.      A  lot  of   individuals 
standing  up  and  for  half  an  hour   talking  about  how    great  his  or 
her  program  is  and  then  making  a  few  jokes  about  how   people  messed 
up  by   working  in  a  foundation  mode.      But  of   course,    the 
implications  are  there  on  the  importance   of   the  foundation  in 
question. 

Morris:       That  was  one  of   the  questions  I  wanted  to  ask  you  about  today  is, 
in  working  with  foundations  jointly  and  just  being  in  the  milieu, 
if  you  have  a  sense  that  some  of   the  people  are  more  concerned 
about  the  glory  of   their  foundations  and  about  the  people  that 
they   are  working  with.      I've  come  across  that  suggestion  in  my 
reading. 

Sally  L:      In  our  kind  of  work  I  wouldn't  really  know   except  by   hearsay,   and 
of  course.    I  hear  that  all   the  time.      I  do  not  find  that  true 
because  there  are  very,   very   few   foundations  in  the  work  of 
prevention  of  nuclear  war.      I  mean,    I   think  there  are  maybe  ten — 
maybe   twenty,    including  individuals  who  run  their  own  foundations. 
There  are  very,   very,   very  few.      So  I  don't  know    that.      Honestly, 
my   own  experiences  have  been  through  excellent  foundations. 

Morris:       Do  you  use  people  at  other  foundations  to  check  out  applicants? 

Sally  L:     We  work  with  other  foundations  all  the  time,    all  the  time. 

Actually,    in  a  way  we  perform  a  small   service  to  foundations   that 
are  not   in  this  field  or  who  are  just  beginning  in  this  field. 
There  are  two  new   foundations,    oh.    three  foundations   that  are 
turning   to   this   field.      I'm  sure  more  than  that  since  we've  been 
in  business.      There's  one   I   think  of   particularly  who   calls   us 
four  or  five  times  a  year  to  ask  us  about  what  we  think  of 
different  organizations. 

In  a  way.    we  do   put   out   a  service   for   them,    because   it's  not 
only  a  technical   field,    but  it's   also  a  matter  of  experience  and 
judgment   in  the  political   field,    which  we  have  really  great 
expertise  in  because  of  Wayne.      So   that  we  really  have  as  much  of 
an  overview    in  the  field  as,    I   think,          any   foundation  does.      In 
fact,    probably  more,    because   the  very   big  foundations  wouldn't 
even  look  at  the  small   grants  that  we  make.     They   wouldn't  look  at 
things  like  a   $5000   grant.      They   don't   give   to   something  like 


127 


Sally  L:      North  Carolina  SANE,    or  a   group  in  Eastern  Washington  that  is 

worried  about   the  nuclear  reactor  that  is  built  like   the  one  at 
Chernobyl. 

Morris:        Is  that  because  they  know  that  you  are  now  in  the  field? 

Sally  L:     No,    because   they   can't  afford  to  give   grants  like   that.      They 
don't   have   the   staff.      Big  foundations   don't  have   the   staff   to 
give   small   grants.      It's  really   difficult,    you  know,    if  you  look, 
and  I'm   sure  you  have.     That  is  why   a  few    foundations  still  make 
grants  to  us.      It's  one  reason.      Normally,    I   think  I   said  to  you, 
foundations   do   not   support   us  because  foundations   don't  like   to 
give  other  foundations  money.      They   don't  want  other  foundations 
to  make   decisions  for  them. 

Of   course,    we're   supported  by   a  few    foundations.      I  shouldn't 
say  "of  course,"  perhaps  but  that's  the  fact.      Anyway,    when  we 
have  served  as  an  operating  foundation,    that's  something  else,    and 
if  they  like  the  program  they  fund  it. 

But  for  general   support,    I  think  less  that  20  percent  of  our 
money   comes  from  foundations.      I   don't  really  know   the  exact 
percentage.      I  could  find  out,    as  a  matter  of  fact.      This  would  be 
an  important  thing  to  do,    because  that's   changed  since  the 
MacArthur  Foundation;  they  gave  us  a  generous  grant  for 
development.     .The  other  foundations   that   support   us — there's   one 
foundation  that's   given  us  $35.000  a  year.      Wayne,     [calls  to  Wayne 
Jaquith  who  is  passing  by   in  the  hall.     Jaquith  joins  interview 
briefly]    would  you  say  20  percent  of  our  funds  come  from 
foundations  (which  is  very  hard  for  me  to  really  believe  nowadays) 
depending  on  what  you  include  in  foundations? 

Jaquith:   Yes,  something  like  that. 

Sally  L:  Would  you  then  include  things  like  Hardy  as  a  foundation?   And  you 
think  20  percent  comes  from  foundations? 

Jaquith:   Yes,  and  from  Muskiwinni,  and  a  couple  of  others. 

Morris:   That  is  a  generous  sum,  a  sign  of  confidence  in  your  work.   In 
general,  do  you  go  to  them  or  have  they — ? 

Sally  L:  No,  we  go  to  them.   The  Kaplan  Fund  is  a  good  example.   Usually  it 
doesn't  give  outside  of  New  York  State.   They're  a  very  big 
foundation.   It's  in  one  family.   It  gives  us  $35,000  because  the  , 
family  wanted  to  give  money  to  prevent  nuclear  war. 

Morris:   So  they  made  an  exception  to  their  own  guidelines. 

Sally  L:   Right. 

Morris:   Because  you  had  become  acquainted  with  some  of  the  directors? 


128 


Sally  L:      Yes,    the   person  who  runs  it.     Very   often.    I'm   afraid,    all 

fundraising  depends   to  a  degree  on  personal   communication.      Yes.    I 
became  acquainted  with  Joan  Davidson.      And  she   became  interested 
and  became  my   friend.      Muskiwinni,   which  Wayne  just  mentioned,    is 
one   of   the  Joint  Foundation  Support  foundations,    and  I   don't   know 
who  the  family   is   that  gave  that  money. 


Women's  Leadership  Development;   Affecting  Public  Decisions 


Sally  L:     Of  course,  we  tried  to  raise  money  for  different  programs,  on 
occasion.      In   particular,    there's  a  program   called  Women's 
Leadership  Development — because  women  are  not  well  represented 
even  today   in  the  field  of   security   and  arms   control,    although 
it's  extraordinary  how  many  enormously  informed  women  there  are  on 
nuclear  issues.     But  we  all  know  what  a  hard  time  they've  had. 
women,    getting  in  government.      Even  in  the  universities, 
particularly  in  this  field.      So  often  you  find  academics  in  this 
field  with  very   small  jobs  in  universities  you've  never  heard  of. 
Anyhow,    we  make  a  concerted  effort  in  grantmaking  to  try  and 
develop,    enlarge  the  role  of  women.      At  the   same   time,    it   seems 
that's  a  good  way  to  raise  money  to  support  this  particular 
program  area.      That's  what  Muskiwinni  supports,    because   they  are  a 
foundation  that  likes  to  support  women  and  women's  issues. 

Morris:        So  they  see  the  Ploughshares  program  as  a  way  to  develop  women's 
talents. 

Sally  L:     In  this  area.   yes.      I  don't  know  what  Muskiwinni  gives  to — they 

don't  really  send  out  a  report,    but  I  do  know   that  they   give  many 
grants  to  support  women,    equality   of   opportunity   for  women. 

Morris:        I'd  like  to  go  back  a  minute  to  the   comment  you  made  that  it's   a 
political    field.      I  was  wondering  if  that  was  the  primary 
consideration  when  you  were  looking  for  a   staff   person,    that  you 
were  feeling  that  the  grants  you  were  making  were  becoming  more 
political? 

Sally  L:     When  we  hired  Wayne?      No.    I  don't  think  we  realized  what  we  were 
getting.      Wayne's  leaving,    by   the  way.      I   mean,    actually   he's   not 
leaving   us.      He's   going  to  be   our  East   Coast   director,    but   that's 
going  to  be  half-time  until  we  have  a  new   director,   who  we   do  need 
full-time.      Whether  we  can  afford  it,    I  don't  know.      I  think  when 
we  hired  Wayne,   we  were  so  new;  we  really  didn't  know  how  valuable 
that  would  be   to  us.      But   in  these  years,    it  has  been  extremely 
valuable, and  he  happens  to  be   one   of   these   people  who  knows   every 
congressional    district   in  the  country,  and  people  in  them.      It's 
been  very   useful.      But  he's   always  worked  in  the  field   of 
prevention   of   nuclear  war.      I   shouldn't   say    that,    he's   an 


129 


Sally  L:     attorney;   but  he  worked  with  the   [Walter]    Mondale  campaign,    really 
organizing  peace   groups  for  Mondale,    so  he  knows  many  people  in 
the  field. 

Morris:        The  prevention  of   nuclear  war — it's  not  political    in  the  sense 
that  it's  Democratic  or  Republican? 

Sally  L:     But    it's  highly   political,    because  it  depends  on  decisions  both 

the   Congress  and  the   Senate  are   going  to  make  as  well,    of   course, 
as  the  administration. 

If   one  had  to  put  what  Ploughshares   does  in  one  line,    and  I 
don't  like  to   do  it,    it  would  be  educating  the  public  to  use 
democracy,    the  democratic  form  of  government,    to  put  pressure  on 
their  representatives  to  vote  as   the   citizenry   thinks   they    should. 
And  we  hope   that  citizens'   groups   see   the  supreme  importance  of 
avoiding  nuclear  war  at  all   costs.      So  I   think   that's   really   the 
major   thing  we  do.      Now   there  are  all  kinds  of  ways  of  going  about 
that.     Just  all  kinds  of   paths  to  take,    tasks  to  pursue,    because 
we  need  research,    as  well  as  public  education,    as  well  as  training 
organizers  as  well  as  journalists,   as  well  as   providing  material 
to  journalists — all  kinds  of   things.      But,    of   course,    our   one 
major  goal  is  to  affect  policy.      We're  in  business  for  just   that, 
in  the  final    analysis. 

Morris:        That's  very  brave.      A  lot  of   foundations  stay   away   from   that. 

Sally  L:     Exactly.      And  that's  why   they -are  not,    because  foundations   stay 
away   from   politics  as  much  as  possible.      War/peace  issues  are 
political.      You  were   talking  about  the  Council  on  Foundations 
before.      The  subject   doesn't  even  come  up  at  its  annual   meetings 
any  more.      This  year,    for  instance,   at  the   council   meeting,    there 
was  no  one  meeting — no  seminar  or  panel   that  dealt  with  this 
subject.      Although  one  after  another   of   the  major  speakers  at 
plenary   sessions   say   to  the   foundations,    "You  shouldn't  be   dealing 
with  anything  until  you  get  rid  of   the   threat   of   nuclear  war." 
But    that's   the  last   that's   always   said  about   it,    because 
foundations   certainly    don't  like   to   be   political. 

Morris:        It  can  cause  you  problems? 

Sally  L:      Oh,   yes.      It   did  at  first   cause  us   this   tremendous   problem. 

because  we  didn't  have  any   idea  whether  this  thing  was   going  to  fly 
or  not.      Fly — I   should   say   crawl  would  be  a  better  term  for  it. 


130 


Donor  Growth 


Morris:        I  don't  know   that   crawl   is  the  word  for  it.      Going  through  your 

annual  reports,    it  looks  like  in  three  years  your   donors  went  from 
62  in  number  to  950.      That's  a  major  achievement. 

Sally  L:     Actually  we've   doubled  in  size  every  year  since. 

Morris:       What  were  the  initial   strategies  that  you  used  to  go  out 
recruiting  donors? 

Sally  L:     I  think  none  of   this  would  have  happened  except  for  the  fact  that 
Tom  Layton     and  Lew  Butler     and  Bill  Roth  were  all   so  tremendously 
active  in  getting  us  started,    not  with  dollars  but  with  creative 
good  sense.      I  truly   think  they   didn't   even   consider   that   this 
would  be  more  than  a  small  kind  of  an  organization — a  little  local 
affair.      They  said  so  often.      They  had  no  idea  where  it  was   going, 
and  I   didn't  have  enough  experience   or  knowledge,    Gabriel le.    to 
know  that  there  were  some  of  these  strikes  against  it.      I  had  no 
sense  of  it  at  all. 

They   didn't  say,     Tom      and  Lew      and  Bill,    with  all   the 
experience  in  the  world  in  foundations,   never  said,    "Well,   you 
know,   building  a  foundation  has   something  to  do  with  politics. 
It's   going  to  be  very   difficult."     They  never   said   that.      But   they 
tell    me   every   week  that  they   can't  believe  what's  happened.      And  I 
get  letters  from  foundations  that  were  in  this  field,    from   people 
like  David  Hunter,    who  was  a  leader  of  the  progressive  foundations 
for  many  years.      They  can't  believe  this  happened.      So  I   think 
everybody  has  been  surprised.      But  no  one  told  me — and  it 
wouldn't  have   stopped  me  anyway,    of   course — that  a  foundation  that 
deals  with  influencing  government  policy   head-on  is  going  to  have 
a  bad  time. 

Morris:       But  apparently  you  struck  a  note  in  going  out  to  donors,   who  also 

either  didn't  recognize  that— 
Sally  L:      Individual    donors   of    a  certain  sort  don't  have   that  problem.      A 

lot  of   people  actually   say,    "One    shouldn't  have  anything  to   do 

with   influencing  political   decisions."     Imagine!      In  this   country. 

this  democracy! 

Morris:       Did  they   therefore  not  choose  to  support  politics? 

Sally  L:      The  people  of  my  economic  and  social   milieu  did  not  and  do  not 
support   issue-oriented  politics  very   often.      It's   not  because 
they   don't  believe  in  prevention  of  nuclear  war   per   se.      Everybody 
believes   in  that. 


131 


Morris : 


Sally  L 


Morris : 
Sally  L; 


Morris : 
Sally  Li 


And  so  what  did  you  do  in  going  out  to  your  initial  donors? 
they  local  or  did  you  start  with  the  mail? 


Are 


I  had  lists  of  some   people  who   could  be  interested  in 
international   problems,    and  then  lists  of   friends.      We  started 
locally.      We     got  very  little  money  from  outside  the  Bay   Area 
originally,    although   I   served  on  other  boards,    two  boards  anyway,  in 
the  East — Amnesty,    and   I   served  on  my   college  board.      I   don't 
remember  if  those  people  supported  me  or  not,   but  my  name  was 
slightly   known  in  the  field,    among  a   small   circle   of   people.      So 
when  I  wrote  a  letter,    it  wasn't  just  out   of    the  blue.      And  it 
was   done  very   personally,    as  it  is  today. 

On  a  one-to-one  kind  of  basis? 

No,    I  mean  the  letters  were  very   personal.     And  we  kept   that 
style,    I  think,    because  it  was   simply   started  that  way.      The  first 
letters  that  were  written  probably  were  typed  out  by  me.      They 
were   asking  for  money,   and  I,    of   course,    put  money   into  it.      So 
the  first  year  we  were  able  to  give  away — we  started  in  November 
1981,   and  the  first   calendar  year,    I  think,   we  were  able  to  award 
something  like   $110,000.      But   there  were  administrative  expenses. 

You  were   still   operating — 

I  paid  for  what  help  we  had  and  I  worked  part-time,  for  I  was  still 
working  at   the   gallery.      I  had  a   part-time   secretary. 


First   Executive  Director^  1982;    More  on  Grants   to   Individuals 


Morris:        And  you  were   still  working  out   of  your  house? 

Sally  L:      Yes,    until   the   fall  of  1982,   we  hired  a  wonderful,   brilliant 
executive   director.      She   came   to   us   actually   from  a  big 
department   at   Stanford.      I  really   talked   to   the  board  about 
the  need   for  an  executive  director  and  what   it  would  mean   to 
Ploughshares. 


As   supportive  as   the  board  was,    they   didn't   think  of  it  as  an 
institution  at   that   time.      I   don't   think  they   thought  of 
themselves  as  building  an  institution,    and  I   didn't  know   in  those 
days  what  building  an  institution  meant.      I   think  they   thought, 
"Of  course,   we  want  to  do  something  to  stop  war,    and  we   know 
somebody   that  we  like  and  have  worked  with  before,    who  should  be 
given  a   chance  to  try  out   this  modest   project." 


132 


Morris :        You  all   thought  of   it  more  as   sort  of  an  ad  hoc   committee? 

Sally  L:      No,    I  think  not.    because   there  was   an  ad  hoc  committee  to  put  it 
together  in  the  first   place.      Then  many  members   of    that   stayed, 
and  there  weren't  that  many   members,    but  Tom  was  on  it.      And  Bill 
Roth  was  on  it,    and  Lew  was  on  it.      Quite   a  few    people   that  were 
on  it  didn't   stay.      Susan  Silk,    at  Columbia    [Foundation]    was  on 
it.      Okay,    and   I've   forgotten   that.      That's    important.       Columbia 
gave   us  a  grant  the  first   two  years,    of    $15,000,    and  that  was 
because  we   gave  money   to  individuals. 

Morris:       Which  they  don't? 

Sally  L:     Which    they    don't.      And   it's  very   unusual,    very,    very    unusual    for 
foundations   to   give  money   to  individuals.      Because   it's    difficult 
to  do   unless  a  foundation  is   set   up  to  do  it.      And  that  was  of 
great  interest  to   some   people.      The  Goldman  Fund  also  supported 
us;    I'm  not   sure  that  it   supported  us   the  first  year,    but   I   think 
maybe   they   did.      And   they  supported  us  quite   generously   for   three 
years.      That's   Rhoda   and  Dick  Goldman  here.      And  a  big  part  of 
that — Columbia  is   definitely,  because  we  supported  the  individual. 

Morris:        And  that  was   part  of   the  original   policy   that  you  worked  out  in 
your  ad  hoc   committee? 

Sally  L:     Yes.     Gabrielle.    I  had  no  idea  that  it  was  unusual   to  fund 

individuals.      I    didn't   know   anything  about   foundations   at   all. 
But   surely   if  you  were  going  to  do   this,    anything  of   this   sort, 
naturally  you'd  want  to  fund  individuals.      Individuals  are  the 
people  who  make   the  decisions,    who  do  the  research,    who  can  be  in 
a  leadership  position.      And  often  are  in  a  place  where   they    can't 
be  supported  and  do   the  kind  of  work  that  we  want  them   to  do,    that 
is  important  for  them  to  do,    unless  there  is  a  way   to   give  money 
to    individuals. 

Morris:        Well,    you  would  think  that   the  people  and  the  kind  of   research  that 
you  supported  would  be   connected  to  a  university  or  a   think   tank. 

Sally  L:     Not  necessarily  at  all.      Let  me  give  you  an  example  in  the  arts, 
for  instance,   where  an  artist,    instead  of   having  to  teach  for  a 
year,    is   given  a  grant   so   that  he  can  work  in  a   studio. 

We  have  on  more  than  one  occasion   given   grants   to  scientists 
who  have   to  be   head  of  job  responsibilities  in  order   to  do  their 
own  research.      The  last  one  was  a  scientist   by   the   name   of  Earl 
Ettienne.    who's  a  biochemist,    and  had  a  j  ob  in  a  university,    but 
he'd   done   a  lot  of   research  on  his   own  on  how   x-ray  lasers   can 
really   poison  the  atmosphere  and  how    there  can  be  fallout  on  the 
earth.      Nobody's  looking  into   that.      He  had   to  leave   his  job   in 
order  to  do   the  research,    and  nobody   took  him  on.      There  wasn't  a 
university    that   took  him   on,    because  it  wasn't  his  field.      So  we   gave 


133 


Sally  L: 

Morris : 
Sally  L: 

Morris : 
Sally  L: 


Morris : 


Sally  L; 


Morris : 
Sally  L: 


him   $10.000   to  do  some  research.      Actually,    it  is  unfortunate  in  this 
case   (you  win  some,   you  lose   some);  Earl   did  not  get  taken  on  by   an 
institution.      We  tried  to  help  him   do  so.      But  he   didn't.      That 
happens . 

The  idea  didn1 t — 

Oh,  the  idea.  I'm  sure  he's  still  working  on,  but  we  hoped  he'd  be 
taken  on  as  a  fellow  by  Brookings,  or  Institute  of  Policy  Studies, 
or  some  other  think  tank. 

Did  you  set  up  some  kind  of   a  special   process  for  handling  the 
bookkeeping  for  grants  to  individuals? 

Yes.      Yes.     But  it's  so  hard  to  do.      I  don't  understand  why, 
exactly.      I   don't  really  know   about  foundation     law   except  about 
our   own.      I   don't   understand  why  other  foundations  don't  support 
individuals.      I've  never  understood  it.      It   does  take  a  little- 
yes.      A  foundation  has  to  set  up  a  special  process  for  doing  it. 

Also  funding  an  individual  without  an  institution  behind  him 
or  her  means  taking  a   chance.      For  instance.    Earl's   grant  was  a 
gamble — one  of  many.      We  hoped  that  Earl  would  be  taken  on,    as   I 
say,    so  that  he  could  go  on  with  his  research.      But  we're  happy 
his  work  went  as  far  as  he  got,   and  the  papers  he  wrote  will  be 
probably  taken  on  by   somebody  else   somewhere  and  built  upon. 
We've  had  one   after  another  experience  of   that  kind.      Just  many, 
many   experiences  of   that  kind. 

Did  you  have   somebody   go  talk  to  the  attorney   general's   person  on 
charitable  grants  or  did  they   provide   information  at  any  point 
about — ? 

Without  any  question  about  it.    of   course,   we  had  to  have  an 
attorney.      Tom  Silk  who  is  an  expert  in  nonprofit  law   took  care   of 
all   our  requests  in  setting  us   up  in  the  first  place. 

Some  individual   grants  are  interesting.      For  instance,    there 
is  the  retired  major  general  who  comes  from  an  old  South  Carolina 
family   of  five   generations  or  something.     He   goes  around  and  talks 
about  how    Star  Wars  is  never  going  to  work,    in  the  South,    and 
that's  an  obvious   grant.      The   guy   checks  out,    and  we've  heard  him 
speak,    and  you  talk  to  him  and  you  know    that  he  actually  does  get 
the  Rotary   Club  to  listen  to  him  and  so  forth  and  so  on.      You 
know,    that's  a  pretty   good  grant  for   $5000.      So  we  give  that  kind 
of  a  grant   often.      That  kind  of   thing  is  quite   simple  to  work  out, 
if  you  talk  to  the  person. 

Now   did  he   come  to  you,    or  did  you  go  to  him? 
He   came   to  us. 


134 


XII     BROADENING  PLOUGHSHARES'    IMPACT 


Strenthening  Grantee  Organizations 

Sally  L:     We  also  have  given  the  kind  of  a  grant  where  we  know  that 

somebody's   down  on  his  or  her  luck,  and  we  are  supporting  the 
person  for  the  work  that  might  be  done  with  a  boost,  considering 
past  accomplishments  and  the   individual's  energy  creativity  and 
dedication.      I  can  think  of   at  least  two  cases  like  this,    ana 
they  have  panned  out. 

Morris:       No,    it's  very  useful. 

Sally  L:     For  instance,    there's  a  wonderful  woman,    Cynthia  Lazaroff.   who 
speaks  Russian,   and  who  taught  for  a  year  in  Moscow,  then  in 
Georgia.      She's  a  wonderful  young  woman,.      We  first  knew   and 
supported  her  for  a  packet  of  information  which  she  put  together 
with  a  lot  of   people,   and  got  published.      It   teaches   grammar 
school   children  about  what's  happening  in  the  Soviet  Union,    and 
has  produced  a  lot  of  pen  pals,    and  so  forth.      That  would  be  a 
very   natural   grant  for  us  to   give,    because    she's   a   superb   educator, 
and  there  are  not  very   many   people  with  her  experience  and 
leadership  quality.      There  weren't  a  few  years  ago,  anyway. 

She  began  this  program,  which  perhaps  you've  heard  of   because 
it  was  filmed  and  then  has  been  shown  on  many,   many  television 
programs.      It  was  even  shown  in  the  White  House.      In  it.    a  group 
of  young  people  from   the  United  States  meets   Soviet  young  people 
in  the   Caucasus   to  climb  together  the  highest  peak  in  Europe. 
It's  a  very,    very   moving  film.      Cynthia  put  that  together.       I 
think  for  three   summers   there  were  climbs  in  the  Caucasus.      Then 
last  year,    the  Soviets   came  to  the  U.S..    and  they   did  a   climb  with 
Outward  Bound  in  the  Rockies. 

Now   we,    it  happens,    do  not  fund  that  kind  of   an  exchange.      I'm 
not   saying  we  wouldn't,    but  it's   been  the   sense   of  our  board   that  we 
only   give  to  exchanges  with  the  Soviet  Union  that  really  can  affect 
policy    changes.      We    don't   fund   children   or  young   people's   activities- 


135 


Morris : 
Sally  L; 


Sally  L: 


Morris : 
Sally  L: 

Morris: 
Sally  L: 

Morris: 
Sally  L! 

Morris : 
Sally  L; 


Morris : 


People-to-people  things. 

Yes,    and  this  is  a  people-to-people  thing.      But   Cynthia  Lazaroff 
is  a  national   treasure.      Because  of  what   she   did,    because   of  her 
visibility,    her  office   gets  questions  all   the  time,    and  she's  able 
to  help  people  who  are  putting  on  different  kinds   of   exchanges. 
And  she  herself  is  a  role  model,    and  on  that  basis  we  were  happy 
to  make  her  a  grant. 

fi 

She  was   really  hungry,  though.      Her  institution  was  gone;  what  money 
she  made,    she  had  to  put  back  into  her  staff,   you  see.      She  was 
very   thin,   and  she  was  looking  very   drawn,    and  I  heard  that  she 
was  having  a  tough   time.      So  our  board  didn't  hesitate  to   give  her 
$7500,    although   (we've   done  this  before)   we  said  $1000  of    it  had 
to  be   spent  for  her  to   go  East  and   go  to  foundations  and   get 
funded,   because  she'd  never  taken  the  money   to  do   that. 

I  noticed  some   of   those   grants  in  the  annual   report.       It's   a  very 
interesting  device. 

Well,    we  don't  mind  our  own  business  at  all.      So  that's  a 
wonderful   grant.     Her  organization  got  bigger  and  bigger,   and  now 
they're   going  to   China,    and  now   everybody's  listening  to  her,    and 
she's   got.you  know — 

So  that  $1000  was  enough   to  get  her — 

Foundations  now   support  her.      Foundations  won't  support  you  unless 
you  go  and  see  them. 

That's   right.      And  sometimes  it's  difficult   to  see  them,    as  you 
said  earlier. 

We've  done  that  twice,    three  times  now.      We've  given  a  grant,    and 
sometimes  we've  given  $1000  on  top  of  whatever  it  is  to  go  East 
and  raise  money   from  foundations. 

Does  that  go  with  a  letter  from   Ploughshares  to  whoever  at  East 
Coast   foundations   saying  you  should  look  at  this — ? 

No,    it   doesn't;  but,    perhaps,   with  a   phone   call.      We're   in   touch 
with  many   of   the  foundations  in  our  business  in  a  very,   very  close 
way — we  talk  to  them  all  the  time.      Everybody  likes  to  feel 
important,    and  the  way   I  feel   important  is  by  phoning  and  saying. 
This  is  a  good   grant."     It's  one   of   the  most  enjoyable   parts   of 
my  job — particularly  when  it  works. 

Somebody  that's  gotten  some  support  from  you  and  needs   more 
money — 


136 


Sally  L:      Yes. 

Morris:        —to  continue,    or  something  like   that? 

Sally  L:     Well.    I  think  all  foundations   do.   but  I  do  it  a  lot.    because 

Ploughshares   gives  more  seed  grants.    I  think,    in  this  field  than 
others — certainly  we  take  more  chances.     Just  because  we  are   small 
and  because  we  have  an  overview   of   the  whole  field  and  expertise 
that   grows   every   day.    this  is  a  service   that   the   directors  like  to 
perform — helping  a  promising  project   get   started.      In  Cynthia's 
case  it  was  a  rescue  grant  till   she  could  tell  her  story  to  other 
foundations. 

Morris:        So  this  is  somebody  who's   going  on  to  another  project  and  then — 

Sally  L:     Oh.    she's    going  to   continue   that.     Her  office  is   getting  bigger, 
her  projects  are  getting  bigger.      Oh,    no.    it's  going  to  go  on  and 
on  and  on.      By   the  way.      I'm  not   saying  that  we   don't  sometimes 
make  mistakes.      I   can  think  of  a  few   instances  where  individual 
grants  have  not  worked  out  as  we  hoped. 


Nuclear  Issues  in  the  Foundation  World 


Morris:        It  sounds  like  you  began  making  grants  while  you  were  still 
putting  your  foundation  together  and  still  developing  your 
financial  base. 

Sally  L:      Oh,    yes.      Oh,    yes.      Well,    we  still  are.    of   course.      The  making  of 
grants  to  individuals  was  part  of  our  policy  from   the  first.      We 
didn't   realize  how   unusual   it  was.      The  ad  hoc  group  that  put 
Ploughshares  together  were   all  enthusiastic  about   the  idea   of  it 
and  putting  together  a  flexible  foundation  process.      But   they   had 
no  idea  how   far  it  would   go.      I   think  they   thought  of  it  as   sort 
of   an  experiment.      Now,    they   scratch  their  heads  in  disbelief   and 
say,    "I   can't  believe  that   this  has  happened   to   this 
organization."     Of   course,    they   were  very   serious  about   the  issue 
from   the  first,   but  most,   like   myself,   didn't  know   much  about  it 
except  what  was  reported  in  the  newspapers.      We  did  a  lot  of   self- 
education,    because  it's  a   complicated  field. 

Morris:        Reading,    or — ? 

Sally  L:     Reading,    and  I  would  send  them   articles  that  I  could  understand 
myself — ones   that   didn't   depend  on  technological    theory.      All    of 
us  learned  together. 

Morris:        And  some   of  your  advisers  are  experts   in — 


137 


Sally  L:      Oh,   yes,    but  the  first  adviser  we   got,   and  that  helped   us 
immensely,   was  George  Kennan. 

Morris :        Did  he   sit   down  with  your  ad  hoc   committee? 

Sally  L:     Oh,    he  shared  with  me  personally,   but  he  didn't  come  out   to  San 
Francisco.      Through  a   great   stroke  of  luck,    I  was  able  to   go  to 
Princeton   to   see  George  Kennan,    who  is  hard  to  see.      He's  hard  to 
see,    because  everybody  wants  to  see  him,    and  he's  aged  today.      I 
told  you  about   the  first  meeting  of   the  Yacht  dub  group  of   so- 
called  "foundations  and  funders" — involved   in  global-security 
matters.      It  was  in  October,   the  year — we  gave  our  first  grants  in 
November  1981. 

This  group  eventually  met  at  least  a  dozen  times  and  became 
so  institutionalized  and  bureaucratic  that  it  stalled  of  its  own 
weight. 

Morris:       All  of  you  were  people  interested  in  peace — ? 

Sally  L:      That's  right,    and  the  nuclear  issue.      A  number  of   them  were 

thinking  of   changing,    widening,    broadening.      Very   interestingly — 
this  is  the  really  interesting  thing — maybe  the   second  meeting,    or 
the  third  meeting,    somebody  came  from  Rockefeller  Brothers,    a 
woman  whose  name  is  Hilary  Palmer.      Rockefeller  Brothers  had  never 
given  a  grant  in  this  area. 

And   (there's   an  end   to   this   story)   she  said  there  was  one 
member  of  her  board  who  was  interested.      And  she  was  able  to   get 
them   to  make   some  very   good  grants  particularly  in  proliferation, 
which  is  a  very,   very  hard  field  to — so  few   people  even  want  to 
deal   with  it.      It's   so  terribly  complicated,    the  spread  of  nuclear 
weapons. 

Anyhow,   leadership  of   the  Rockefeller  Brothers  Foundation 
has  within  the  last  month  changed  from  David  Rockefeller  Sr.    to 
David  Rockerfeller  Jr.,    and  he  immediately  announced  that  they 
were  going  to  have,    I  believe,    only  two  program  areas,    one   of   them 
the  prevention  of  nuclear  war,    let's   say   global   security,    and  I 
think  the  other  is  in  the  environment.      So  it  went  from  nothing — 
I'm  talking  about  four  years  ago — 

Morris:        To  a  real — 

Sally  L:      To  a  real   commitment.      Of  course,    there's  a  big  change  between 
David  Sr.   and  David  Jr.,   but   still. 

Anyway,    this   group — I  keep   getting  off  the  subject.      Anyway, 
I  was  there,    a  total  neophyte.      Oh,    I   think  I  had  talked  to   some 
of    these   people  about   starting  a  foundation,    and  they   said,    "Oh, 
yes,    dear.     Why   don' t  you. "      [laughs]      Patronizingly,    but  kindly. 


138 


Sally  L:      And  then  they   said.    "Well,    you  should   get  yourself    some   advisers." 
You  can't  imagine  anybody   who  knew   less  about  this.      So,    one  man 
smoking  a   cigar  laughingly   said.    "Oh,    go   get  yourself  George 
Kennan. "  not   knowing     that  I  had  an  appointment  with  George  Kennan 
that  afternoon  in  Princeton — which  was  one  of   the   great   triumphs 
of  my  life. 

Morris:       Oh.   my.   you  already  had  the  appointment. 

Sally  L:      I  had  already  the  appointment,    so  I  went  up  and  saw  him.    and  he 

was  very   interested  in  the  idea  of  Ploughshares  and  was  enormously 
gallant.      Since  then  we've  become  friends.      And  the  moment  he 
became  an  adviser,    I  mean  we  could  get  any  adviser. 


Morris :  Then  people  began 

Sally  L:  Take   us — oh.   yes. 

Morris:  — think  this  is  something  we  should  work  on. 

Sally  L:  At  least  they  put  their  name  on  paper. 

Retired  Military  Advisers 


Morris:   I'm  interested  in  the  number  of  military,  army  and  navy  persons 

among  your  advisers.  Were  some  of  those  still  on  active  service? 

Sally  L:  No. 

Morris:       Were  they  people  who  had  resigned  from  the  military  because  of 
their   concerns  about  nuclear  weapons? 

Sally  L:     Are  you  talking  about  that  in  grants,   or  in  people  who  are 
advisers  of  ours? 

Morris :       Both. 

Sally  L:     I  think  we  only  have  one  who  is  an  adviser  of  Ploughshares, 
though  there  are  numbers   of   people  in  the   Center  for  Defense 
Information.    Gene  LaRocque's  outfit   (which  is  made   up,    by   the 
way,    of  retired  admirals  and   generals)   who  believe  in  changing  the 
nuclearization   of  U.S.    defense   policy,    and  have   for  a  long   time. 
We  have  funded  a  number  of  speakers,    particularly  somebody  who  was 
in  charge   of    the  space   program   for   the  navy,    who  goes  around  the 
country  talking  about  the  reasons  that  a  Star  Wars   system  will 
never  work.      He's  very,   very   effective.      He's  a  grantee  of   ours. 

Morris:        He's  a   grant,    but  he  is  an  active — 


139 


Sally  L:     No.    no.    no.      None   of   them  are  active.      We  have  had  a   couple   of 
retired,    by   the  way,    officers,    who  have  applied  for  this  job  as 
executive   director. 

Morris:        Do  you  get  a  sense  that  there  is  a  debate  within  the  office  ranks 
in  the  military? 

Sally  L:      I've  never  asked,  and  I  don't  know.     I  do  get  that  sense  that 
there  is.     I  get  a  sense  there  is,  but  just  like  in  all  the 
countries  that  we  criticize  all   the  time,    the  military's  pretty 
strong  in  this   country.      Isn't  it?      I  mean  there  are  a  lot  of 
careers  that  depend  upon  it. 

Morris:        True.      But   there's  more  than  one  way   to  fight  a  war,    presumably. 

Sally  L:      Yes,    but  if  you're   going  to   disagree  with  a  policy   totally,    you 
aren't  going  to  keep  your  job  as  an  important  officer,    are  you? 
If  you  disapprove  of   the  fact  that   there  are  submarines   carrying 
missiles  that  can  wipe   out  a  country   in  a  minute  and  you  say  so, 
you're   probably  not   going  to  be  very  popular  with  the  Pentagon. 

Morris:       One  assumes  that  the  military  leadership  is  part  of  the 

decision-making  process,  and  if  you're  talking  about  alternatives 
to  global  security,  what  sense  do  you  get  of  what  kind  of  debate, 
if  any,  is  there  within  the  upper — ? 

Sally  L:      I   can  only  answer  you  what  I  think  personally.      I  don't  know 

anybody  in  the  army,    in  the  navy,    but   this  is  the   sense   I   get.      In 
the  first  place   it's  well-known  that  the  uniformed  armed  forces 
are  as   crazy  about  nuclear  war  than  those  in  business  suits.      That 
is  well  known  today.      Oh,  absolutely.      Absolutely. 

A  lot  of  money  is   going  to   developing  nuclear  weapons   that 
can  never  be   used.      It  is  being  taken  way   from  other  weapons 
systems   that,    let's   say,    the  army   or  navy  wants  to  use —     What's 
it  do  to  their  careers?     I'm  really  talking  about  it  from   a 
selfish  point  of  view,    not  from   the  philosophical   or  ethical   or 
anything  else  point  of  view,  now.      But  one  can  imagine  for  the 
career  officer  that  a  nuclear  area  is  not  commensurate  with  what 
they've  been  trained  to  do.      They've  been  trained  to  manage   a  war. 
You  can't  fight  a  nuclear  war.      So  I'm  not   talking  about  whether 
you  want  to  wipe   out  Russia  or  you  want  to  wipe  out  the  rest  of   the 
world.      I'm  not  talking  about  any   of   those  things  you  and  I  worry 
about.      Just  talking  about   the  military   from   a  career  point  of  view. 

Morris:        Is  that  the  sense  of  some  of  the  people  who  are  now   retired,    who 
are  working  with  places  like   the  Center  for  Defense   Information? 

Sally  L:      I  don't  know  how  many  there  are,   you  know,    how  many  retired  people 
there  are  who  are  involved  with  us.      I  sense  there  are  quite  a 
few,   not  professionally,    but  I  sense  there  are  quite  a  few  who 


140 


Sally  L:     would  agree.     But  those   that  I  know   about,   and  are  known  about 
nationally,    are  few.      They're  very   effective   spokesmen.      On  our 
advisory  board  is  someone  who  is  extremely  active  in  this  area — 
Admiral  John  Lee,    who  has  for  years  been  retired  and  is  a  great 
scholar  and  spokesman  on  nuclear-war   prevention.     A  lot  of   these 
people  have  a  very   different   point  of  view    than  you  or  I  might, 
you  know.      I  mean,    Squidge  Lee,   who,    as  you  know,    is  a   close 
friend    [of   mine],    did  a  whole  big  study   for  years  of  officers  from 
NATO   (North  Atlantic  Treaty  Organization]    after  he  retired  on  how 
conventional    forces   should  be  built  up.      Well,    that's  a   terribly 
destructive  theory.     But  you  see,    I  don't  know   if  he  believes  in 
that   today.      I   haven't   seen  him   in  two  years.      I've  been  in  touch 
with  him.     But  you  see  what   I'm   saying:      that  might  be  a   typical 
point  of  view,   you  see,    of   an  army  or  navy  officer  from  a 
professional  point  of  view. 

I'm  not  accusing  him;    I   think  he  is  a  highly   idealistic   man. 
But  if   it  were  your  profession,   you'd  want  to  improve  your  forces, 
and  you'd  be  involved  with  the  traditional   idea  of  a  powerful 
military  force  being  the  only  protection  of  your  country.      And 
that's  not  only  in  your  own  career  potential,    but  your  loyalty  to 
the  navy  would  want  you  to  see  that  the  navy  is  better-run,    that 
your  ships  are  in  better  shape,   that  your  personnel   gets  well 
paid,    and  all   that  stuff.      Wouldn't  you  protect  not  only  your 
country  but  your  navy  itself  without  depending  on  nuclear  weapons? 

Morris:        I  understand  that  the  inter-service  politics  are  quite  a 
complicated  subject   of   their  own. 

Sally  L:      I  know  very  little  about  it,  but  I  think  one  of  the  things  that 
would  be  most  helpful.    I   guess  it's  pretty   obvious,    in  this 
country  is   if   the  military   services  were  all   under  one   command. 

Morris:       Unified—? 

Sally  L:     Unified,   yes.    so  they  weren't  competing  for  dollars  all   the  time. 


Narrowing  Granting  Focus;   Replacing  the  Executive  Director 


Morris:        What  kinds  of  criteria  did   the   board   develop  for   selecting,    making 
choices  between  one   applicant  or  another?      I   guess  before  that, 
did  you  have   the  experience   common  to  many  foundations   that   there 
have  been  more  proposals  and  requests  for  support  coming  in  than 
the  foundation  Ploughshares   could  fund? 

Sally  L:     Well,    of   the  proposals   today   that  we  get  that  we  could  consider, 
that  are  within  our  guidelines,    probably   something  like  400   a 
yeai — this  year  we  funded  120. 


141 


Morris:        That's   pretty   good. 

Sally  L:     A  lot  more  come  in,    of   course,    that  aren't  within  our   guidelines. 

Morris:        Was  it  that  kind  of  numbers  in  1979?      Did  you  have   to   go  out  and 
put  announcements  out  within  the  nonprofit  world  that  you  were — 

Sally  L:     We  were  known  quite  fast.      Of  course,   we  got  very  few   proposals,    I 
guess,    to  start  with,    and  besides  which,    we  learned  on  the  job. 
That  first  year,   we  gave  a  couple  of  human-rights   grants  before  we 
decided — but   that's  my  background,    before  we — 

Morris :        Decided  to  narrow  it   down? 

Sally  L:     Decided  to  narrow    it   down.      I  had  just  gone  to  Cuba  with  David 

Hunter,    and  I  gave  a  grant  of  about   $1500   to  a  journalist  who  was 
going   there   to  report  on  the  threat,    if   any,    to  the  United  States. 
But   that's   the   size   grant  we  were   giving,    because  we   didn't  have 
any   money . 

Morris:       What  was   it   that  brought  about  the  decision  to  narrow   the  focus? 

Sally  L:      As  I  say,    it  was  just  meeting  together  and  making  decisions 

together  and  seeing  what  the  need  was,    and  seeing  how  we  could  be 
most  effective.     We  made  some  hard  decisions  along  the  way.      Human 
rights  were  the  first  thing  to  hit   the  dust,   and  then  in  1983    I 
went  east  and  spent  some  days  looking  into  what  was  happening  in 
Central   America,    to  see  whether  we  should  get  in  the  Central 
American  field — 

Morris:        In  terms  of   the  political — ? 

Sally  L:      Yes.      In  terms  of   the  policy  of   the  United  States  and   the  whole 
thing  of    intervention.      But   the  board  turned  it   down,    quite 
legitimately. 

Morris:        Really? 

Sally  L:     Yes,    because   they   said  we  didn't  have  any   expertise   in  Latin 

American  affairs,   which  was  true.      They  said  if  we   could  afford  to 
hire  an  expert — I'm  not  sure,    at  that  time,    whether  we  had  our 
first   director  yet  or  not. 

Morris:       What  kind  of  background — 

Sally  L:      She  has  a  Ph.D.    in  what  you  might  call   a  double  discipline  which 
is   given  at  Columbia  in  nuclear  weapons  technology   and  politics 
and   the  Soviet  Union.      You  can  get  a  double  degree  in  that  at  the 
Harriman  Institute.     And   she  was  at  Stanford  in  that  biggest  and 
best   of   all    international    security   programs   in  universities   (it's 
by  far   the  biggest).      It  was   one   of   the   twenty    that   Ford   started. 


142 


Sally  L:      It's  enormous   because  it's   received   one   after  another  very   large 

grant.      That's  where  she  was  at   the  time   she  applied  to  me  for   the 
job  of  executive   director.       She's   an  absolute   brilliant  young 
woman. 

Morris:        So  by   the  time  she  came  on  board  you  were  already  nrettv  much 
focused   in   the  nuclear — 

Sally  L:      Yes.      We   always  were  focused  on  that.      That  was  the  whole  purpose 
of    the  foundation.     But  it  was  hard — it  remains   difficult — not   to 
address   policies  that    foment  conflict  that   could   light   the   spark  of 
war.      It's  not  really  very   important  whether  it  was   after   she   came 
or  before   that   I   tried  to  make   a  case   to  fund  Central   America.      I 
don't  really  recall.      She  came  to  work  a  little  less  than  a  year 
after  we   started.      She  was  brilliant,   very  knowledgeable.    She  was 
really  one  of   a  handful   of   individuals  with   the   capabilities   for 
running  a  foundation  and  at  the  same  time  dealing  with  the  complex 
issues   on  which  we  focus.      It   turned  out  it   didn't  work  out  at 
all.      That  was  a   tremendously  painful   and  difficult  experience, 
which  makes  us  all   think  that  if  we  could  recover  from   that   crisis 
that  we  could  weather  anything  in  this  foundation.      But  we  really 
had  a  terrible  time. 

Morris:        This  wasn't   the  right  kind  of   nonprofit  work  for  her? 

Sally  L:      She  really  didn't  know  how   to  work  with  other   prople  and   she  was  a 
terrible  administrator.      Terrible.      It  was  a  very,   very  painful 
thing.      And  all   the  time  my  husband  was   dying,    so  it  was   a  real 
emotional    trauma  as  well  as  an  administrative  crisis.      It  was  a 
terrible  mess.      One   of   the   things   that  happened   (it   seems   in 
retrospect,    I  suppose,    sort  of   funny)   was   that,    after  discussions 
with     her,        Ploughshares  was  being   given  a   $350,000  grant  from 
the  Carnegie  Foundation  to  make   small   grants  for  general    support. 
For  us  it  was  tremendous. 

But   naturally,    as   in  all   cases,    it's   the  staff   that  deals 
with   the  staff.      It  isn't   the  board  that   deals  with  staff.      So    she 
had  done   all   the  groundwork,    which  is   normally   true.      It  hasn't 
been  in  our   case  because   I  am   partially   staff,   and  in  a   couple   of 
instances  it  has   not  been  altogether   true,    or  Wayne   and  I   have 
been  interchangeable.     But  that  is  normally,    of   course,    what  would 
happen.      So  we  had  to  ask    her         to  leave   after   some   terrible 
stormy  metings,    before  Carnegie  signed  on  with   the   grant,    because 
we  couldn't  fire  her  afterwards.      It  would  have  been  unethical. 

Morris:        Because   she  was  a  big  part  of    the   project? 

Sally  L:     Well,    she  was   the  person  who  had  arranged  it.      So   they   didn't  give 
us   the   grant.      And   they  never  have.      In  those   days   it  was  very, 
very   hard  to   swallow,    although,    you  see,    Tom   and  Lew   had  a  broader 
view    of    this,    because   they   said   they   never  expected   that  any 


143 


Sally  L:      foundation  would  give  us  a  grant  anyway.      We've   grown  so  much 

since   then.      In  talking  to  you  about  it  it  seems   sort  of   amusing 
to  me,    in  the   past. 

Morris:        Growing  pains,    once   they're  over  and  you've  learned  from   them, 
they're  tales  to  recall.      Then  how  long  was  it  before  you  found 
Wayne? 

Sally  L:     Wayne.      It  was  five  months  maybe,    or  so.      He  was  working  for 

Mondale  until  Mondale  was  beaten.      It  was  in  November    [1984]    that 
he  came  to  work.      We  decided  to  hire  him  the  previous   September. 

Morris:        Partly  because   of  his  national  political  experience? 

Sally  L:     His   experience  was   enormous.      He  had  been  (I   don't  know    if  you're 
familiar  with  Physicians  for  Social  Responsibility) — he  was   their 
first  executive  director.      And  then  he  was  the  executive  director 
of   something  called  LANAC,   which  is  Lawyers'   Alliance  for  Nuclear 
Arms  Control.     He  did  that  for  about  three  years,    and  then  he  was 
the   so-called  Freeze   coordinator  for  the   Mondale   campaign.     Also 
he  had  done  some  work  for  Congressman  Ed  Markey.    who  is  really  the 
most  prominent  congressional  spokesman  in  this  field.      So  he  had 
real   experience. 

Morris:        So  he'd  been  in  the  field  as  long  as  you. 

Sally  L:      Much,    much   longer  than  I.      And  terrific,    oh  yes.      We  had  a  lot  of 
applicants.      I  think  we  paid  $30,000  to  start.     But  he  was  the 
only   applicant,    I  have  to  say,    that  seemed  appropriate.      He  has 
done  a  wonderful  job.      Tommorrow  he's  leaving,   you  see. 


Responding  to  World  Events;   Treaty  Verification 


Morris:        Has  he  been  helpful   in    further     refining  Ploughshares   granting 
policies? 

Sally  L:     He  has.   but  in  this  kind  of   a  foundation,    so  much  depends  on  what 
is  happening  in  Washington,   and  Moscow,   and  Third  World  countries, 
and  the  world.      It   depends  on  the  news.      I  can  think  of   all  kinds 
of  instances. 

Very   early  on,    before  our  second  meeting,    someone  who  I  had 
hoped  would  give  us  some  money  and  would  be  interested  in  our 
approach,    was  a  very  wealthy   physicist   I  know.      He  called  me  on  a 
Christmas  Eve  in  1982  and  said,    "I'll  never  give  you  any   money 
because   one   can't  verify   the  components  of   any   treaty   with  the 
Soviets."     And  I   didn't  even  know  what  he  was   talking  about,  at   the 
time. 


144 


Sally  L:      So  I  did  some  reading  and  at  the  next  meeting  we  had  of   the  board, 
I  said.    "We've  got  to  go   into  verification."     And  we  did. 

It's   a  long  story.      But  we  were   the  first   people,    I   think,    to 
ever— among  foundations — go  into  this  area.     But  anyway,   we  did 
develop  a  program  of  research  and  writing  for  policymakers  and  the 
public  on  the  political   thinking  that  determines  decisions  on  what 
can  or   cannot  be  verified  in  the   compliance   of  arms  treaties. 
Nations  often  make   such  decisions  on  bases  unrelated  to  the  treaty 
itself.      Actually  technologically  a  nation  can  verify   almost  any 
treaty  today,    as  you  know;    but  politically  it  not  only  doesn't 
trust  the  enemy,  it   doesn't   trust  its  own  technology.      And   the  man 
that  you  read  everywhere  on  this  subject — the  person  most  often 
quoted — is  Michael  Krepon.  who  we  finally  were  able  to  identify, 
to  hire,    to  work  on  this  project.     This  was  a  very   large   program 
for  us,    over  a  two-year  period. 

Morris:        Involving  Russian  scientists — ? 

Sally  L:     No.  it  only  involved  Americans,  but  the  people  Mike  had  as  his 
team  were  all  former  CIA  directors  or  former  negotiators, 
etcetera,   etcetera,  who  knew   this  field  tremendously  well. 
Anyway,   we  not  only  could  not  go  on  supporting  it,   but  it  is 
extremely  difficult  to  be  in  any  control  from  3000  miles  away. 
(He  was   in  Washington,    of    course.)      We  didn't  have  a  big  enough 
staff  to  really  be  in  constant  contact  and  monitor  such  a  project. 
So  Carnegie  took  it  on.   which  was  wonderful. 

Morris:       They  haven't  funded  you,    but  they  have  continued  some  of  your 
projects? 

Sally  L:     Well,   actually  it's  different  Carnegie — the  Carnegie  Endowment  for 
Peace.      The   Carnegie  Corporation  is  what   didn't   fund   us.      Although 
now   we're  very   good  friends.      I  have  phoned  them   and  said,    "Why 
don't  you  fund?"      [laughs]      And  I  have  lunch  with  the   chairman   of 
the  board. 

But   the  only   reason  for  large   foundations  to  fund 
Ploughshares  is   that  we're   set  up  to  make   small   grants,    to 
research  and  to  monitor  them.      With  a  foundation  that  makes  huge 
grants  in  the  effort  to  reverse  the  arms  race,    why  would  it  make   a 
grant  to  little  Ploughshares?      Carnegie  and  MacArthur  give  several 
millions  of  dollars  a  year  in  this  field.     But  they   give  a  lot  of 
it  in  big  block  grants,    hundreds  of   thousands  and  million  dollars, 
for  instance,    to  a  university   to  set  up  a   program.      The   only 
reason  such  a  foundation  would  fund  us  is  because  we  give  small 
grants  and  it   could  wholesale  money   through   us. 


145 


XIII  EVALUATION;  SOME  SIGNIFICANT  PROGRAMS 


Monitoring  Grants  and  Applicants^ 


Morris:   How  do  you  determine  whether  it's  been  a  successful  grant? 

Sally  L :  We  do  it  like  any  other  foundation,  except,  of  course,  one  can 

count  hospital  beds.   You  pay  for  ten  hospital  beds,  you  see  that 
you  get  them.  We  do  the  same  thing  as  far  as  monitoring  the 
donees.   We  have  them  report  at  certain  periods.   We  follow  what 
they  do  as  much  as  possible — although  it's  hard  when  you're 
funding  nationally. 

In  fact,  we  fund  internationally,  make  grants  overseas.   Some 
day,  if  we  do  grow  (with  the  stock  market,  maybe  you  doubt  that) 
we'd  like  to  have  a  program  officer  overseas  so  we  could  monitor 
grants,  but  we  do  have  grants  overseas. 

It's  very  hard  to  tell  in  this  field,  in  one  way.  In  another 
way,  you've  got  a  more  daily  check  than  anything  I  know  of,  except 
for  those  traditional  hospitals  beds. 

Morris:   The  daily  press. 

Sally  L:  The  daily  press,  exactly,  where  the  vote  in  Congress — this  year 

the  vote  in  the  Senate  is  dramatic.   The  Senate  up  until  last  year 
has  simply  done  what  the  president  wanted.   The  change  is  really 
the  result  of  grassroots  involvement  in  these  issues.   Certainly 
one  can  say  broadly  of  one's  lobbying  grants  that  lobbying  can 
only  be  as  good  as  the  constituency  behind  it. 

Morris:   Do  you,  does  the  staff  stay  in  touch  with  some  of  the  grantees 
while  a  project  is  going  on? 

Sally  L:  Oh,  yes.   Yes.   I  mean,  there's  some  who  we  don't.   The  small  ones 
tend  to  send  us  information  all  the  time,  because  some  of  the 
grassroots  organizations  or  community  organizations  send  out  a 
bulletin;  that's  part  of  their  business,  to  send  out  a  bulletin  on 


146 


Sally  L:     what   they're   doing.      They   send  it   to   us.      Because  we're   in   this 
business  only  and  because  we  give   so  many   grants,   we're  often 
called  about     activities — kept  in  touch   simply  by   telephone. 

There  are   some  places,    there  is  no  question,    that  we  rarely  see 
the   people.      I  mentioned  North   Carolina  before,    that   comes  to  mind. 
It  happens  to  be   the  best  SANE  group,    group  of    that  society   in  the 
country.      I've  never   seen  the  North   Carolina  SANE   or  its  leader,    but 
we  know   their  reputation — we  know  who  the  people  are.      Unfortu 
nately  you  know,    the  peace   community   is  a   small   one,  after  all. 

As  for  research  grants,    we  can  monitor  them  by  reading  the 
results.      And   then  there  are   some   persons — stunning  grants  we're 
proud  of   that  have  really  had  an  effect.      And  those   again  you  can 
read  about  in  the  daily  papers.      So  that' s — 

Morris:       Do  you  have  any  contact  with  grantees  who  say   this  isn't  working 
out.   but  I  think  if  we  change  the  plans  a  little  bit — ? 

Sally  L:     Yes.      That's   only   happened  three  or  four  times.      I   understand  from 
Tom  Layton— I  used  to  be  in  constant   contact  with  them    [Gerbode 
Foundation]    about   these   things — that  happen  very  often.      It's 
only  twice  in  what  must  be  altogether  at  least  350  or  400  grants 
that  Ploughshares  has  made,    that  they've  actually  done   something 
completely  different  and  never  asked  us.      I  remember  once  we   got  a 
letter  from   a  grantee  where  she  wanted  to  use  the  grant 
differently,    a   curious  letter.      And  the  board,    I   sent  a   copy    to 
the  board,    the  board  was  furious.      I  didn't  know   enough  to  be 
furious.      They   said  you  don't   do  that  to   a  foundation,    but   there 
isn't  a   damn  thing  you   can  do  about  it.      Don't  you  hear  that  from 
other  foundations?      I  mean,    I   guess   if  you're   paying  for  something 
that1  s  hardware — 

Morris:        If  you've  funded  somebody   to  buy   a  new   heater  and   they   chose   to 
buy  a  stereo  with  it — 

Sally  L:     That's  right. 

Morris:        You  might  question  it.      But   the  comment  that  I  have  heard  is  that 
quite  often  what  you  set  out  to   do  as  a   grantee  turns  out  not  to 
work  as  well,   but  with  some  modifications  and  advice  from  the 
granting  agency   sometimes  you   can  produce  a  better — ? 

Sally  L:     Oh,    that's   right.      That  happens  very,   very   often.      That  happens 
very   often.      And  believe  me,    some   things   don't  work  out,  partic 
ularly   in  a  program   like   ours  which   is  largely  devoted  to  public 
education  which,    in  itself,    is  a  somewhat   immeasurable  field   of 
endeavor.      But   it's  only   twice   that  we've  made   a  grant  where  people 
have  misused   the  funds.      And  I   don't  mean   that   they   pocketed   the 
funds   either,    but,    for  example,    that   they   used  the  money   to  hire  a 
secretary   rather   than  to  write   a  leaflet  or   some   such. 


147 


Political  Education,    1983-1984;   Other  Strategic   Concerns 


Morris:        Could  we  talk  a  little  bit  about   this   program  in  1983,    when  the 

board  voted  extra  funds   to  do   some  political   education  during  the 
1984  election  campaign?     Was   that  a  departure  or — ? 

Sally  L:     No,    I  think  it's  a  way   of   focusing  what  we  do.      In  times  of 

election,    groups  involved  in  these  issues  have   someone  to  talk 
to— to   try    to  influence   their  point  of  view   on  security.      They've 
got   candidates.      That's   all   that   that  means.      Already,    this    time 
around,    we  certainly  have  made  grants  making  it  possible  for 
regional   groups   to  address   their  representatives  and  the 
candidates.      For  instance,    we   supported  the  debate,    which   is 
referred  to  all   the  time  now,    of  the  Democratic   candidates  in  Iowa 
when  they   talked  about   these  issues.      We  will  support  other 
debates.      Of   course,    you're  talking  about  the  Senate   two  years 
ago.     We  supported  coalitions  of  peace  groups  in  states  where 
they  could  be  effective  in  working  to  get  out  the  vote  or  to  help 
a   candidate  who  was  very   good  on  these   issues.      Colorado  is  one 
that   comes  to  mind.      Timothy  Wirth  is  very,   very   strong  on  global- 
security   issues.     And  we  fund  the  Colorado   Coalition,   which  was 
really  helpful  to  Tim  in  his    [pause] — speaking  out  on  issues  which 
were  high  on  his   campaign  agenda. 

Morris:        Now  Tim  is  a   candidate? 

Sally  L:      Tim  Wirth  became   the  Senator  from   Colorado,    and  he's  a  real   star 
in  this  field.      In  some   states  we  would  not,    for  instance, 
support—there  are  some   states,    and  I   can't  name   them   right  now,    I 
could  have  last  year,   where  we  knew  a  candidate  was  very   good,    and 
he  was  very   good  on  these  issues.      But   then  the  voters  in  the 
state  are  not  as  progressive  as  he  is — or  sometimes   they  are  much 
more  so. 

Morris:        So  he   doesn't — 

Sally  L:     That's   right.       So  we're  not   going  to   support  a  local   group  whose 
activity  will   detract  from   the  election  of  a  good   candidate. 
That's   the  kind  of   thing  that  Wayne  is  very   good  on.      As  a  matter 
of  fact,    that's   the   sort  of   tactical   information  that  is  handily 
available   to  Ploughshares. 

Morris:        That's   a  very   delicate  matter. 

Sally  L:      It's   a  delicate  matter.      It  really   is.      Bob  Edgar,    who  ran  for 

Senate,   and  who  missed,   is  just  enormous  on  these  issues.     He  was 
a  very   effective   congressman.      Strategically,    in  the  part  of 
Pennsylvania  where  he  had  to   get   the  votes,    it  would  have   been  a 
mistake   to  highlight  our  issues. 


148 


Sally  L:     There  are  probably  fifty   grassroots   groups  that   come  to  us  a  year 
for  funding  from   different  states,    from  different  areas.      We  would 
choose   the   ones  where   there's  a   swing  vote,    a  legislative  vote,    or 
an  electoral  vote  that  would  be   affected  by  a  well-organized 
activity.      But   these   are   exceptions.      Again,    let's   talk  about 
North  Carolina,    because   it's  a  great  example.      We   continue   to 
support  them  because   they  have   organized  so  brilliantly   in  that 
state.      They've  brought   in   people   from   all   segments  of   society. 
We've  given  them  $5000  a  year. 

Morris:       What  is  there  about  North  Carolina? 

Sally  L:      There's  nothing  about  North   Carolina.      But   there's   something  about 
North   Carolina's   SANE   group.      It   is   so  well  organized  and  it   sent 
out  such  good  literature.      And  the   people  who  run  it  are   so   smart, 
and  they   get   such  good  media,    and  they   do  all   the  things   about 
public  education  that  you'd  like  a   citizens'  group  to   do.      So.    of 
course,    we  would  support  them,   whether  they  had  a  vote  or  an 
election  to  influence.      I   don't  even  know  who's   running  from  North 
Carolina — 

Morris:       You  don't   think  of  North  Carolina  as  being  a  terribly  politically 
movable — 

Sally  L:     No,    but  you  think  about  what  you  want  the  electorate  in  North 
Carolina   to  know   about   this  issue.      In  fact,   we   spent  as  much 
money   as  we  could  in  the  South,    because  that  is  the  least  educated 
region  on  this  issue  in  the    country. 

Morris:       Are  there  nuclear  plants  in  North  Carolina? 

Sally  L:     Not   that   I  know    of.      There  very  well  may   be.      I   don't   know.      There 
isn't  a   state  that  I  know    of   that  doesn't  have  either  a  Freeze  or 
a  SANE  or  some  other  kind  of  a   group  working  for   peace.     But  you 
can't  support  all   of   them.      For  instance,    we   support  a  number  of 
groups,    or  have  over  the  years  and  will   continue  to  in  Nevada  and 
Utah,   because  so  many   of   those  people  have  been  affected  by 
radiation.      Some  of  them  by  testing  of  nuclear   bombs — so   there  we 
can  see   a  great  deal   of   personal   persuasion  against  nuclear 
testing,    which  is   one   of  our  major  topics.      So   that's  why  one 
would   fund  in  Nevada  and  Utah.      Really  all   I'm  saying  is   that 
there  are  reasons  for  funding  in  different  parts  of   the  country 
and  there  are  reasons  for  not  funding  in  different   parts  of    the 
country,  too. 

Morris:        Strategic. 

Sally  L:      It's   strategic,     that's   right.      For   instance,    we   don't   fund  very 
much  in   California   because   they   don't   need   it.      But    I   think, 
although   there  is  a  very   big  peace   group  in  San  Diego,    I   probably 
wouldn't  fund  a   peace    group  in  San  Diego  with   the  enormous 


149 


Sally  L:      industry   that  exists   there.      I   don't   think   that   peace    groups  are 

going  to   be  very   effective.      I'm  glad  this  is   confidential,    by   the 
way. 

Morris:        The  house  rules  are  that  you  get  the  first  transcript,    and — 


Qualifications   of  Applicants,    Site  Visits 


Sally  L:      Oh,    nobody  would   care.      It's  just  that  when   people    (I'm  looking  at 
the   phone) — there's  not  a  day   that  passes   without  at  least  two 
phone  calls  from   either  an  individual   or  a  foundation  about 
funding  one   or  another  organization  or  person  or  place.      And  I'm 
always  tempted  to  tell   them,    if  I  know — 

Morris:       Why   it's  not  a   good  area? 

Sally  L:     Yes,   why   it's  not  a  good  area  to  fund,   or  why  it's  not  a  good 

organization  to  fund.      Sometimes   I   do  tell,    and  sometimes   I   don't. 
You  know,    you  don't  want  to  criticize  other  people's  work,    but 
there  are  some  organizations  that  are  totally  ineffective,  and 
money   for  support  is  so  very   scarce. 

Morris:        I  read  that  in  the  nonprofit  world  that's  a  big  concern  that   a  lot 
of   organizations  with  good  instincts  are  not  very   well   run.      Is 
Ploughshares  one   of   the  foundations   that  puts   grants  into  helping 
organizations   strengthen  their  board  and  staff? 

Sally  L:      Oh.  sure.     We  do  all  the  time.     Oh  gosh,  yes.     But  I'm  just 

talking  about — the  great  example  is  that  somebody   from   the  great 
big  MacArthur  Foundation  phoned  us  to  ask  about  a   grant  for  a 
proposal    that  had   come   to  us   too.      Well,    the  proposal   was  for 
$150,000  from  a   peace   group  in  San  Francisco   that   I'd  never  heard 
of,    and  that's  a  little  hard — 

Morris:        That's  hard  to  believe. 

Sally  L:     No  one  had  ever  heard  of  the  people  on  the  board.      Reading  the 
resume  of  the  man  who  would  run  it,    he  made  one  immediately 
suspect   that  he  is   unqualified.      And  he  wanted  $150,000   for  no 
reason  at  all  and  no  means   of   accomplishing  it.    to  run  a 
conference  with  all   the  best  people  in  the  world  to  come  to  his 
outfit  and  talk  about   peace.      The   MacArthur  Foundation  phoned  and 
said,    "Should  we  fund  it?"     Well,    Ploughshares   didn't  even 
interview    the   director,    even  though  he's   right  here  in   San 
Francisco.      The  program  was  built  on  sand,    at  least  as  it  was 
described  in  the   proposal. 


Morris : 


Sally  L: 


150 


How  many   of   the  requests  that  are  within  your  area   do  you  actually 
have  contact  with,    have  them   come  in  and  talk  to  you  about — ? 

As  many   as  we   can.     But  we  also  make   site  visits.      We   don't 
normally   make   site  visits   unless  we  are  in  the  area  (and  we  are 
not  usually)   to  grassroots   groups. 


Morris:       Yes.    that  would  be  kind  of   hard. 

Sally  L:      It  would  be  kind  of  hard.      I  can't  ever  give  you  exact  numbers   or 
percentages   because   I  don't  think  that  way,  unfortunately.      We  have 
seen  quite   a  few   of   the   groups   that  are  in  the  western  region.      They 
make   a  visit  frequently.      Then,    too,    people  tend  to  come  to  San 
Francisco  even  from   grassroots   organizations.      I   go   to   Princeton. 
Wayne   goes  to  Chicago,    other  parts  of   Illinois,    Pennsylvania.      We 
both  go  to  Washington,    to  Minnesota.      Yes,    it's  true.      We  have 
seen  many   of   them. 

Morris :        The  larger — ? 

Sally  L:     And  the  larger  ones,   we  have  seen  all  of   them. 


The  Nuclear  Issues   Community;   SANE.    Freeze,    etc.,   and 

Funding   Sources 

Morris:       They  tend  to  be  people  that  you  work  with  over  several  years. 

Sally  L:     Yes,    or  maybe  they  come  in.     We  just   gave  a  large   grant  to  someone 
who  happened  to  be  here,    large  for  us,    $35.000,    to  start  an 
institution  called  the  Pacific  Institute  for  Peace  and 
International    Security,  which  researches  and  traces  the  social 
upheaval  and  possible   conflict   that  is   caused  by   environmental 
factors.      Perhaps  the  most  obvious  is  the  decimation  of   the  rain 
forests  which  forces  populations  to  move  in  search  of  new  farm 
land  or  urban  jobs.      The  man,    Ronnie  Lipschutz.    was  in  Berkeley, 
and  he  was  highly  thought  of,    and  came  to   us   through 
recommendations  from  people  who  knew   him  such  as  John  Hoi  den,   at 
Cal,  under  whom  he'd  written  his   dissertation. 

That  was   taking  a  big  chance   that — I'm  not  going  to  go  into 
the  thinking  behind  the  grant,   but  yes,    if  we  were  going  to 
give   a  grant  of   that   size,    certainly   of   that  kind  of   risk-taking, 
we   definitely  would   talk  in   great   detail    to   the   person,    in   person. 
Wayne  has   spent  at  least   two  weeks  a  year,    more  or  less,    in  the 
East,    most  of  it  in  Washington,    New    York,    Boston.      But    I  would   say 
90   percent  of    the  people  to  whom  we  make  grants  we  talk  to  in 
person. 


151 


Morris:       By   the  time  you've   gotten  around 

Sally  L:     To   giving  the   grant.      This  is  the  process  we've  gone  through  and 
it's  worked  very,   very  well.     Wayne  and  I   go  through  the  whole 
list  of   grants  that  are  within  our  guidelines  and  agree  on  the 
ones   to  research.      Then  after  much  discussion,   we  agree  on  the 
ones  to  put   on   the  docket  before  it  ever  gets  to  the  board.      We 
have   paid  a   site  visit  if   necessary.     However,    it  is  not  always 
necessary  because   sometimes  we  are  considering  a  grant  to  an 
organization  that  we  know  very  well,   and  it's   come  up  with  a 
program    that's   important  and  has   potential   impact.      That's 
happened  very   often.      We  haven't  had  to  pay  a   site  visit   because 
we  know   the  organization  so  well. 

Morris:        You've  watched   the  evolution — 

Sally  L:     Yes,    yes.      Besides  which,   you  see,    our  funding  community   is   so 

limited.      Of   the   people  who  make   grants  in  this  field.      I   can  pick 
up  a   phone  and  ask  one  or  another  person  who's  right  there  on  the 
spot  about  it,    and  also  there's  not  a  day   that  we   don't   talk  at 
least  two  or  three  times  to  some  political  person  in  Washington. 
When  I  say  political.    I  mean  it  in  the   sense   of   someone  who  really 
knows  how   votes  in  Congress  and  the  Senate  are  being  affected  by 
one  or  another  organization. 

Morris:        Is   that  a  person  who's  in  elected  office   or  their  chief  aide — ? 

Sally  L:      It  isn't   somebody  in  office.      It's   somebody   usually,    or   often,    a 
grantee  of   ours,    who's  right  there  on  the  spot  and  who  has  a  very 
broad  view  and  has  had  a  lot  of  experience,    who   could  tell   us 
what's  happening.     Or  it's   someone  from   an  institution  with  common 
goals.      That's  really  because   of  Wayne  being  in  Washington  and 
intimately  acquainted  with  these   people  that  we  have  had  lines  of 
communication,   but  now   I  know   them   too.     As  long  as   they're 
grantees,    they  will  continue   to  give  us  information,    of   course. 

It's  just   tremendously   interesting.      For  instance,    we   spent 
hours  on  something,    and  I   don't  know   whether  the  results  are  good 
or  bad.      The  two  biggest   peace  organizations,    the  Freeze  and  SANE, 
merged  this  year  after   two  years  of   talking  and  fussing  about  it. 
I'm  not   going  to   go  into  the   details,    because  it  would  be 
confusing,   but   the  foundations  who  have  funded  SANE  and/or  Freeze 
had  talked  together  about  the  problems  and  what  we   should  do  to 
help,    and  how   we  could  affect  leadership,    and  what  we  should  do 
over  and  over  and  over  again — whether  we   should  or   shouldn't  fund 
them,    maybe  we  should  or   shouldn't  fund  them — we're  still   talking 
about  it  now   that  they've  merged. 

Morris:        That's  really   a  tremendous   step. 


152 


Sally  L:      And  we   used  to,    as   I   say.    meet  at  those  fundraising  sessions. 

Originally,    we  were  to  discuss  problems  with  other  foundations. 
Recently  the  meetings  have  not  been  productive,  in  my   mind,  so  I 
don't   cross   the   country   to  attend.      I  have  a  wise   colleague  in 
Washington  who  thinks   that   the  trouble  is  with  hidden  agendas. 
Since    Ploughshares   doesn't  have   one,     I   can't  judge.      I'm   not 
knowledgeable  enough  about  the  inner  workings  of  other 
foundations. 


Stock  Market  Drop,    1987;   Grants  Budgets 


Morris:        Is  this  the  Yacht  CLub  Group? 

Sally  L:     Yes.     Now   it's  much   smaller.      And  we're  in  the  inner   circle. 

We're  very  definitely  in  the  inner  circle.      Wayne  is  going,    for 
instance,    to  a  meeting  of  no  more  than  five  foundations  in  this 
field  about  an  emergency   that  can  affect  the  movement  seriously. 
What  are  we   going  to   do,   because  money   is   drying  up?     And  it's 
because  of   the  stock  market    [September  1987  price  drops] . 

I  am  absolutely  appalled  at  what  foundations  are  doing.      I  am 
appalled.      But  you've  heard  this,    I'm   sure,    that  foundations   have 
stopped  giving  money.      I  just  keep  hearing  rumors  of   this. 
Yesterday  I  heard  that  the  Rockefeller  Associates,    as  it  is 
called,  which  is  some  numbers  of  millions,   maybe  five  million;   I 
don't  know   how    much — a  lot.      Anyway,    the  youngest  part  of   the 
family   gives  their  money   away  through  a  man  of  the  name  of  Wade 
Green,    and  I   heard  yesterday   that  they   weren't  giving  any   money 
this  year.      That  would   be   terrible.      I    don't   know    that   that's 
true,    but   that  was  what   I  was  told.      And  I  do  know   that  some 
foundations  are  cutting  way  back.      One  foundation  that's   been  in 
this  field  has   decided — it  lost  fifteen  million  dollars  in  the 
stock  market — it's  not   going  to   give  any   money   this  year.      So 
that's  why   there  is  an  emergency   meeting.      How  will  we  make  our 
money   count   the  most?      That  won't  happen  to  us,    because  we   don't 
depend  on  an  endowment.      It  may   happen  to  us  next  year.      We  may 
not  raise  enough  money.      We   said  we'd   give  away  more  than  a 
million  this  year,    and  we  will.      Even  if  we  are  broke   next  year. 

Morris:        Has  your  board  had  a  meeting  about   doing  something  about   the 
portfolio? 

Sally  L:     We   talk  about   it  all   the  time,   but  our  portfolio  is   so   small.      In 
the  first  place,   we  originally  talked  about  whether  we   should   get 
a   financial   adviser,    and  decided  our  principal   was  too  modest.      No 
finmancial   adviser  would   take  it  on.     And  now  we're   talking  about 
it  again.      In  the  meantime  we   invest   in  such  things  as  Treasury 
bonds,    and  our   percentage — 


153 


Morris:        Secure. 

Sally  L:     They're  so   secure  that  we  get.    I  think  we  probably   get  6  percent 
across   the  board.      But  we  just   can't  lose  our  money. 


Women  at  the  US-USSR  Summit;    Some  Reservations 


Morris:         [unclear  sentence]      We  can't  not  talk  about  your  meeting  with  the 
Russian  leaders  in  Geneva  and  Reykjavik. 

Sally  L:      I  went  along  with  a  women's   group  that  we  had  funded.      So 
naturally   I  was  invited  to   go. 

Morris:        Is   that  the  frosting  on  the  women's  leadership  development — ? 

Sally  L:     No,    no.      When  we  listed  what  we   gave  to  women's  leadership  in  our 
prospectus,   we  did  list  it,   however.     This  is   called  Women  for  a 
Meaningful  Summit  and.    by  the  way.   we  are  not   going  to  fund  it, 
though   it   still  exists;   although  we  started  it. 

Morris :        You  started  the   group? 

Sally  L:     We  didn't  start  the  idea.      Somebody  we  know  very,  very  well 

phoned  with  the  idea  and  asked  what  we  thought  of  it.      This  is 
someone  Wayne  particularly  knew  well.      And  we  said  it  was  a  great 
idea,    but  you  can't   do  it  yourself   (because   she  was    doing  another 
job  in  this   field)   unless  you  hire  help,    and  we'll  pay   for   the 
hiring  of   staff.      We   gave  her   $5,000.   by  the  way.      The  organization 
really   took  off.     We  funded  it   three  times,   yes — we  funded  it 
first  for   that   person,    gave  money   to  an  individual,  which  is  the 
way   we  had  to  do   it  at  that  point,    to  serve  as  a   secretary,   and 
then  an  organizer,   and  we  funded   going  to  Geneva,   and  we  funded 
the  trip  to  Reykjavik.     But  we  are  not  going  to  fund  them   this 
time. 

Morris :       Why  not? 

Sally  L:     We  don't  think  it's  effective  any   more. 

Morris:       Because  the — ? 

Sally  L:      I'd  have   to   go   through   all  kinds  of   details  of  why   I  don't  think 
it  is — I  don't  think  you  really  want  to  hear  them.      But  we   don't 
think  it's  well   organized.      They   haven't  really  come   up  with  what 
they  really  want  to   do.      I    don't   think  it's  very   representative 
any   longer.      There's  no  leadership. 

Morris:        And  those  have  been   changed   since   the  summit  trips? 


154 


Sally  L:     Well,    the  preliminary  thing  was  to  be  an  ad  hoc   group.      It  was   a 
very,   very   good  idea  as  an  ad  hoc  group. 

Morris:        And  it   didn't  transfer  into  being  a  permanent  organization? 


Sally  L:     It   could  have  been,    but   I  don't  think  it  has  been, 
not  effective  in  going  to  Reyjkavik  at  all. 


I   think  it  was 


Morris:       Reykjavik  itself  apparently  was  not  terribly  successful. 

Sally  L:     No.     But  the  fact  that  Women  for  a  Meaningful  Summit  was  there  did 
nothing  to  push  world  peace   an  inch  or   two  up  the  mountain. 

In  going  to  Geneva,    there  were  thirty-five  of  us.     What  was 
really  helpful   is  that  it  got  press  and  showed  that  there  were 
women  from  all  kinds  of  different  organizations   all   over   the 
country,    who  were  not  as    [Secretary   of   the  Treasury]   Donald  Regan 
said — that  was  when  Regan  said,    of  course,    the  women  that  are 
here  are  only   interested  in  what  Mrs.   Reagan  is  wearing.      That  was 
wonderful  copy.     Anyway,   we  got  a  lot  of  press.      [Former 
Con  gres  sworn  an]    Bella  Abzug  was  there  and    [writer]   Jane  Alexander. 
There  were  a  lot  of  other  people.      Also,    it  afforded  the  women  who 
went  along,    it  gave  them   something  to  talk  about  on  the  platforms, 
either  small  or  large, in  different  places  in  the   country  when  they 
got  home.     And  I   think  it  was  very,  very   useful    from   that  point  of 
view,   extremely  useful  from  that  point  of  view.      It  was  useful  for 
the  growth  of  Ploughshares.      It  was  very  useful  for  the  growth  of 
Ploughshares. 


Need  for  Visibility 


Sally  L:     You  know    it's   the   darndest   thing.      I  just  hate  this   sort  of   thing, 
but  there's  no  way  that  you're   going  to   get   press   for  a 
foundation.      Oh,    that's  not   true.      If  you're  a  very   large 
foundation,    and  you  give  a   $5,000,000  grant  in  San   Francisco,     a 
$5,000,000  grant  in  New  York,    you'd  get  press,   but  you  know. 

So  we  never  had  any   press  at  all.   at  all.     And  when   I  went  to 
Geneva— oh,    there  were  members  of   our  board  by  that  time  who  had 
been  insisting,    suggesting  that  we   get   somebody   in  public 
relations.      I  said  it  was  ridiculous,    what  are  you  going  to   talk 
about?      And  then  I  was  finally   convinced   that  at  least  we   should 
put   our   toe  in  the  water.      I   have  a  friend  for  instance,    a  close. 
close  friend  who  is  a  journalist  who  years  ago   said,    "Let  me   do  a 
story   on   Ploughshares."     And  we'd  start  talking  about   something 
else  and   that  was   the  end   of   it.     Well,    then  we   got  a  PR  person, 
and  because  we  were  paying  the  PR  person 


155 


Morris:        — to   get  mentions  in  the   press. 

Sally  L:      So   then  I  did  the  story.      Then  we  got  quite  a  few   stories.      They 
were  all   personal — 

Morris:        The  two  or  three  you  sent  me  are  really   interesting  pieces.* 

Sally  L:      Yes.      Well.    I'll   tell  you  that  our  funding  picked  up  to  where 

people   gave  us  money  who  I  know  very  well,   but  who  never  had  given 
us  money  before.      It's   the   darndest  thing. 

Morris:        Did  you  send  out   copies  of   these   articles  that  the  PR  person  had 
developed? 

Sally  L:     No — I  think  we  have   sent  articles  out  on  occasion  for  some  reason. 
I   think  Wayne  has   sent  articles  out  when  he's  writing  "Sally  and  I 
are   going  to  be   in  your   town."     I   once   gave  a  speech  at  Harvard, 
and  he  had  the   speech,    a  little  tiny   speech,   written  up  and  sent 
around. 


Morris:        You  gave  a  speech  at  Harvard — 

Sally  L:     Because  Phil  went  to  Harvard,   and   I  was  invited.      Phil  had  died  by 
that  time,    otherwise   I  never  would  have  gone.      He  never  would 
ever,    ever  have   gone  to  his  fiftieth  reunion.      I  mean, 
absolutely. 

Morris:        Did  you  go  because  it  was  a  good  place  to  make  connections  for 
Ploughshares? 

Sally  L:     No,    because   of   a  minister  who  Phil  knew,    who  said  he  was  a  friend. 
But  I   don't  remember  Phil   ever  mentioning  him,   who  I  had  once  met 
because  he  was  involved  in  human  rights.      He  would  come  to  the 
annual  meetings  of  Amnesty   International,   and   I  was  on  the  board. 
Anyway,    he  phones  me  in  October  to  ask  if   I  would  appear  in  June, 
because  he  was  in  charge  of  the  memorial   services  for  the  fiftieth 
reunion. 

And   I    said,     "You've    got   to  be   crazy."     I   couldn't   possibly — 
My  God.      He   said,    "I'm   going  to  phone   or  write  you  every   three 
weeks    until   you  say  yes,"  and  he  did.      He  did.      And  it  was  five 
minutes   or   something.     Well,    I   guess  publicity   does  help  after 
all. 


*See  appendix. 


Morris : 


156 


Had  Phil  been  particularly  interested  in  what  you  were  trying  to 
do- 


Sally  L:  He  was  extremely  helpful.  Though  it  was  not  his  field  at  all.  He 
was  extremely  helpful.  One  of  the  things  is,  he  used  to  chair  the 
meetings  for  me.  And  to  this  day  I've  never  chaired  a  meeting.  I 
hate  to  chair  meetings. 

Morris:       Really?     Oh,    that's  really  devotion. 

Sally  L:     Well.  yes.      I  mean,    they  were  in  our  living  room,    in  front  of   the 
fire  with  a  drink.      This  was  the  start.      This  was  the  homemade 
organization.      I  was  working  at  another  job. 

Morris:       That's  the  community — 


Nuclear  Countdown  Press  Kits 


Sally  L:     That's  right.      That's   community   activism.      That's  exactly  what  it 
was.      For  instance,    once  he  was  very,  very  helpful.     We   produced  a 
big  press  kit   that  we  were  putting  out  and  sending  around  the 
country.      And  Phil  edited  it  for  us  quickly.      And  he  helped  me  by 
editing  the  letters  I  wrote.      He  was  very,   very  helpful,    but  not 
engaged  in  the   sense  that  it  was  his   sort  of   thing. 

Morris:       Did  he  have  some  suggestions  about  organizing  Ploughshares  and 
managing  it? 

Sally  L:     Not  about   organizing  and  managing  it.   because  he  wasn't  familiar 

with  foundations,  either  particularly.     And  you  see.   he  never  would 
run  an  organization.      He  was  offered  every   press — Harvard, 
Princeton,    Columbia — he  never  wanted   to  be  an  administrator  ever. 

Morris:       Wasn't  he  head  of  UC  Press? 

Sally  L:     He  was  not   the  head,    because  he  would  never  take   the  job. 

Morris:        I  see.     Well,    he  certainly  was  thought  of  as — 

Sally  L:      I  know,    but  he  wasn't,    and  he  never  would  take   the  job  running 
anything.      He  was  very — I  don't  know   what  the  word  would  be — he 
was  always  very  much  behind  the  scenes.      Never  would  take   a 
leadership  job.     But   he  was  tremendously   helpful,    and  he  was   also 
extremely  helpful  because  there  ws   a  lot  of  writing  involved.      He 
was  retired, you  see. 

Morris:        So  he  had  some  extra   time? 


157 


Sally  L:      Oh,   yes.      He  had  nothing  but   time, 
when  we  started  Ploughshares. 


He  was  at  home   all   the   time 


Morris:        That  was   the  nuclear   countdown  press  kit? 


Sally  L! 


Morris : 
Sally  L: 


Yes,    we  did  four  press  kits,    and  actually  we  would  like  to  do 
another  if  we  had  enough  staff   to  produce  it.      It  takes   a  lot  of 
work.      They're  very,   very   successful.      The  first  one  we  did  was  in 
1982,  which  was —     As   I  talk  to  you,.   Gabrielle,    I  could  go  on  and 
on,    because  it   seems  there  are  so  many   funny   stories.      The  reason 
we  did  all   that  business  on  verification,   the  very  big  item   (you 
asked  how    the  board  makes  decisions)  was  because  of   that  Christmas 
call.      Amazing.      I   said  at   the  next  meeting,    "Listen,    we've   got  to 
do   something  about  verification  of   compliance  with  arms  treaties." 
And  then  we  certainly  went  out  and  found  out  what  we  best   could 
do.      But   I   told  you  about   that. 

Now.    the  idea  for  that  first  press  kit   (which  I  did, 
actually,    that  first  summer  before  Gloria  Duffy  came)   came  from   a  2 
a.m.    conversation  with  Hamilton  Fish,    who  at  that  time  was 
publisher   of   the  Nation.     Ham   said  to  me,    "Notice  that   the   small 
papers  in  this   country   have  no  stories  about  arms  control   and 
nuclear  arms."     I   don't  see   small   papers  in  this   country. 


"Oh,    really?"  I   said, 
about.      I  mean,   it  was  not- 


And  so   that's  how    the  press  kit  came 


A  great  light   turned  on  in  your  head. 

Yes,    and   the  board  was  just   delighted  to   go  ahead  with  it.      Oh, 
thought  it  was  a  great  idea,    because  we  were — you  know — 


Morris:       Without  a  lot  of  superstructure. 

Sally  L:     Exactly.      It   is   that  kind  of   a  board — there's  nothing  they   like 
better   than  to  take  a   good  idea  and  run  with  it. 

It  was  like  when  we  were  starting  up — I  told  you  about  that — 
and  decided  we   didn't  need  to  hire  a   consultant   to  find  out 
whether  a  foundation  focussed  on  prevention  of  nuclear  war  was 
feasible. 

The  board  seems  to  be  willing  to  raise  the  money,    they  have 
gotten  the  money.      I   don't   think  that  has   been  a   problem 
particularly,   but  we  have  never  done  things   that  way,    or  finding 
whether  we  really   can  be  successful   in  putting  out  a  press  kit. 

At  that  time,  by  the  way,  the  press  kit  was  an  unusual  thing 
to  do,  and  now  many,  many  organizations  have  produced  one  like  it 
since.  They  found  it  was  very  valuable. 


158 


Morris:        Did  Mr.    Fish  help  with  putting  together  the — ? 

Sally  L:     Not  at  all.      No.    no.    no.      He  was  a  journalist   friend  who  sparked 
an  idea  and  was  totally   immersed  in  his   own  projects. 

Morris:       What  did  you  do  with  it  once  you  put   together   the  press  kit? 

Sally  L:     Oh,   well,  we  found  out  where  you  get  the  list  of  all   the   small 
newspapers   in  the  country.      We  hired  Herb  Gunther  to  find  out. 
It's  not  hard  to  do.    although  the  list  wasn't  that   good.      By   the 
third  time  around  we  did  a  better,    a  more  complete  list.     We 
improved  things  obviously.      As  a  matter  of  fact,    we   did  four,    and 
one   of   them  was   done  totally  for  us  by  the  Arms  Control 
Association. 

Morris:       Mailed  out  to  your  list? 

Sally  L:     Mailed  out  to  our  list  and  their  list  and  produced  toally  by  them 
with  our  financial  support  and  as  a  result  of  our  suggestion.      I 
mean,   we  discussed  it  with  them,   but  they  were — 

Morris:       You  gave  them  a  grant  to  do  it? 

Sally  L:     They  paid  for  half  of   it,    and  we  paid  for  half  of   it,   but  they 
managed  it.      The  other  three  we  managed  ourselves,    although  the 
last  one,    on  the  Comprehensive  Test  Ban,    was  not  written  by  us. 
They've  become  better  and  better.      We   certainly  would  do  it  again. 
It's  just   that  it   takes   so  much  work — we  just   don't  have  enough 
staff. 

I  was   really  only  trying  to  give  you  an  instance  of   the 
somewhat  unpremediated  way  that  process  sometimes  starts  at 
Ploughshares.       I'm  embarrassed  to   say   this  because   I'm   sure  most 
foundations   consider   this  kind  of   spontaneity  frivolous.      But   I    can 
assure  you  that  Lew    and  Tom     Layton     are  very   reliable  folks,    and 
the  rest  of   the  members   of   the  board  are  in  large   part  experienced 
in  our   field.      So  when  they   agree  with  enthusiasm,    we  go  for  it. 


Global   Security;      Future   Plans 


Sally  L:     We  have  another  one  now    that's  really  an  amazing  possibility.     Tom 
and  Lew   are  very   excited  about   it. 

\ 

Morris:       Do  you  want  to  talk  about  it? 

Sally  L:  I'll  tell  about  it.  but  I  don't  know  that  it's  going  to  happen. 
Last  January,  last  winter.  Gorbachev  had  a  meeting  of  people  to 
talk  about  global  security.  He  asked  800  people  from  all  over  the 


159 


Sally  L:     world.      Among  them  was  David  Hamburg,   who  is  the  head  of   the 
Carnegie  Foundation.      And  Mr.    Gorbachev   himself,    or  Evgeny 
Velikov,    said,    or  maybe  David   said.    "How   about  having  a  foundation 
together,    and  we  can  both  work  on  common  problems.      We  can  both 
put  in  money."     Anyhow   that  is  what  is   developing  right  now. 

Morris :        A  U. S.-U. S. S. R.    foundation? 

Sally  L:     U.  S.  S.R.,  U.S..  and  Sweden.      I  don't  know   the  history  of  why 

Sweden   got   into   it.      They're  talking  about   this.      It   may    happen. 
If  it  happens,   what  they  have  been  mentioning  is  that  it  might  be 
done   through  Ploughshares.      Well,    when  I  told  Lew   this  he  said, 
"Of   course,   let's   gol" 

So  I  don't  know,    Gabrielle,    in  mentioning  this,    this  is  just 
based  on  conjectural   talk  so  far.      One   of  our  board  members   came 
in  to  talk  about  it,  for  he  is  very   closely   involved  in  the 
project.      Carnegie  and  MacArthur  are  talking  about  putting  up 
large   funds   after  all   the  intricate  protocol   is  worked  out.      In 
the  interim,    they're  talking  about  running  it   through 
Ploughshares.      We  don't  have  enough  money  to  be  players  in  a  game 
like   that,    but  our   set-up  and  our  guidelines  are  such  that  it 
possibly   could  be   run  through   us  at  the  beginning. 

Morris:        But  you've   got  very   good   credentials  in — 

Sally  L:      In  running  it.      Well,    the  fact  that  Carnegie,    MacArthur,    and  the 
Soviets  would   say,    "How   about   Ploughshares?"     Little,    teeny 
Ploughshares! 

Morris:        That's   pretty  exciting. 

Sally  L:     Yes,    so   that  is  the  way   decisions   get  made   around  here.      That's 

not  true.      Somebody   comes  up  with  an  exciting  idea,    and  if  we   can 
possibly   make   it  work,    we  do.      Now,    there  is  another  idea  we  had 
to   pass   up.      There's   probably   more   than   one.      There's    one    that's 
minor.     Didn't  work  out.     I  couldn't  get  the  staff  to  do  it.      I 
mean,    I   didn't  even  have  enough  money   to  hire   staff   to   do  it. 


160 


XIV     ORGANIZATIONAL    CONCERNS.    PERSONAL    PRINCIPLES 


Board  Selection,    Small  Grants   Committee,    Washington  Office 


Morris:       But  isn't  it  nice  that  there  are  these  ideas  around? 

Sally  L:     Ideas  are   cheap.     As  they  used  to  say  "creativity  and  a  dime  will 
buy  you  a   cup  of   coffee."     That's  when  I  was  in  college  and  you 
could  buy  a  cup  of   coffee  for  a  dime. 

In  this  field,    there  isn't  a  day   that  you  can't  think  of 
something  if   only  you  could  manage  to   do  it.     But   the  exciting 
thing  is,  to  me,  that  we  have  a  board  like  this  one  that  is  so 
thoughtful  and  willing  to  take  a  chance. 

Morris:       That  may  say   something  about  the  board  selection  . 
Sally  L:      It  may,    although  that  could  be  improved  too. 

Morris:       When  there  is  going  to  be  a  vacancy  on  the  board,   does  everybody 
sit  around  and  make  suggestions,    or  is   that  a   separate   committee. 

Sally  L:     Yes.       [chuckles]      We  don't  seem   to  have   committees.      It's  the  same 
people  that  are  on  the  executive   committee.     We   do  have  a  so- 
called  small-grants   committee.      I  think  I   mentioned  to  you  the  way 
we're  organized.      There  are  four  full  board  meetings  a  year,    and 
four  small-grants  meetings,    in  which  we  give  grants  of   $10,000  and 
under. 

Morris:        Figuring  that  those   are  more  urgently  needed? 

Sally  L:     No,    it's  just   that  we   don't  like   to  have   three  months   between 
distribution  meetings.      The  projects  are  often  timed  to  an 
immediate  situation,    one  that  may  be   critical  in  the 
international    scene.      The   over-$10.000    [grants]   are  not 
necessarily  more   urgently   given  than  the  more  modest   grants. 

Morris:        If  you  could,    how  would  you  improve   the  board  selection? 


161 


Sally  L:      Oh,    dear.    I  would  improve  the  board  a  lot.      Number  one,    I'd   get 
another  scientist  who's  really   interested  in  arms   control   and 
global   security.      It's  very  difficult  to  get  academics  willing  to 
give  the  necessary   time,    and  most   scientists  are  academics. 
Academics,    though  we  need  them   desperately,    aren't  the  best  of 
board  members,    because  their  time  has  little  flexibility  because 
of   teaching  class   or  lecturing. 

You  know,    it   takes  a  lot  of   time  for  board  development.      It 
really   takes  a  lot  of    time.      This  is  not  like  a  museum  board, 
which  tends  to  involve  people  that  are  sort  of  half-retired  or 
have  so  much  money  they   don't  need  a  job.      With  maybe  two 
exceptions,    everybody    that's   on  the  board  is   so  busy   that  he  or 
she  really   doesn't  have  a  lot  of   time  to  spare.      And  yet   they 
spend  a  lot  of   time  on  Ploughshares,    take   a  lot  of   responsibility. 
The  executive  committee,    for  a  long  time,    needed  to  meet  every 
week,    I  think,    or  every   other  week  maybe.      Now   it  doesn't  meet  at 
regular  times,    but  there  are  periods  when  they  meet  a  lot  more 
than  most  executive  committees,    I  think.      For  administrative 
purposes,    if  nothing  else,   and,    as  well,    for  policy  purposes. 

Morris:        Is  that  why  you  decided  to  open  a  Washington  office? 

Sally  L:     Well,    the   office  happened  to  be  in  Washington.      It   didn't  matter 

to  us  where  in  the  East  it  was  located.      What  we  need  is  someone  to 
help  f undraise.    purely   for  f undraising,    although  Wayne  won't   do 
all   of   that.      It's  impossible  for  us  to  do  it  only   from   San 
Francisco. 

Morris:        In  order   to  stay   in  touch  with  and  cultivate — ? 

Sally  L:      Yes.    exactly,    and  mostly   to  find  and  meet  with  new   prospects. 

Morris:        The  Washington  location — 

Sally  L:      Is  only  because  the  person  happened  to  live  in  Washington,   because 
it   doesn't  matter  where  the   person  lives  as  long  as  it's   near  New 
York  and  Boston. 

Morris:        You  think  of   that  in  terms  of  being  accessible  to  policy-makers 
too. 

Sally  L:     But   he  wasn't  a  policy-maker.      I  mean,    that  isn't  what  he  was 

hired  to  do.   And  Wayne  is  just  as   good  at  fifty   miles  from  Boston 
as  Steve  was   in  Washington.      Steve  Coleman  did  not  work  out.      It's 
an  extremely  difficult  situation  to  work  with  someone  across   the 
country   from   the  main  office.      That  person  is  on  his  own,    and  the 
administration  has  to  have   complete  trust  that  he's   doing  his  job 
as  agreed  upon. 

Morris:        I   can  believe  it. 


162 


Sally  L:      It  really   is.      It  would  work  out  much  better  now. 
Morris:        Right.      With  somebody   coming  out   of   the  home  office  here. 

Sally  L:     Well,    because  we  trust  Wayne  and  we  know  he  is  working  for  the 
benefit  of   Ploughshares,  not  to  build  his  own  prestige  at  our 
expense.      He's  not   going  to   disappear  for   several   weeks   at   a 
stretch.      But    it's   difficult.       I've  been  involved   in   other 
organizations,    and  Amnesty   International's  a   great   instance, 
especially  when  it  was   getting  started.      An  institution  where  the 
head  office  is  in  one  place  and  you've  got   people  working  for  it 
in   other   places.      It's   awfully   hard.      Perhaps  less   so    today, 
because   of  modern  kinds   of   communication.      Computers.      I   don't 
know   how   to  use   them,    but  we're  putting  in  modems. 

Morris:        All   those  marvelous  computerized  gadgets   can   contribute   a  lot.    but 
it's  different  from   being  able  to  sit  down  and  talk  over  a   cup  of 
coffee :     what  did  that  person  really  mean? 


Public  Foundations;      Increasing  Individual    Involvement 


Morris:        We've  come  to  the  end  of   my  immediate  questions.      Is  there 

anything  that  we  haven't  touched  on  that  you  think  is  important 
to  share  with  people  wanting  to  understand  Ploughshares? 

Sally  L:     There  are  a  couple  of   things  that   I  would  like  to  make  clear  about 
philanthropy    as  we   see  it — two  things.      One   is   that  there  aren't 
many   public  foundations.      In  fact,    I   think  they're    considered  an 
anathema.      Other   foundations  are  very  kind  to  us,    but   I  think  it's 
because   of  our  board  members.      Public  foundations  have  been 
frowned  on  up  until   now    in  the  Council   of   Foundations.     But   public 
foundations  are  extremely   useful  entities,    I   think,    because   they 
can  get  people  involved  in  a  serious  way  with  an  issue,    or  with  a 
series  of  issues.      Our  purpose  in  starting,    which  sometimes  we 
forget  these  days,    is  that  we  were  really  trying  to  get 
individuals  who  have  no  idea  how   to  be  involved,    but  want   to   play 
a  responsible  part  in  the  struggle   to  end  the  threat  of   nuclear 
conflict.     What's  why  we   started  Ploughshares. 

But   it  would  be   true   of   a  lot  of   another  instances.      In 
public  health,    of   course,    there  is  a   cancer  fund,    and  a  heart  fund 
or   something  of   that   sort;    that's  why   people  give  to  those   things, 
isn't  it?     But  if  you  were   dealing  with  a  whole  issue  like 
environment,  for  instance;    the  Environmental  Defense  Fund  and  the 
Sierra  Club  and   the  Natural  Resources   Defense   Fund,    they   are   all 
trying  to  save   the  environment   from   all  kinds  of   attacks  and 
accidents.      They    don't    cover   only    one   environmental    problem.      So, 
for  instance,    I   think  it  would  be   really   useful    to  have  a 


163 


Sally  L :      foundation  like  this  one  which  could  choose  where  the  important 

things   are  happening  in  the  whole  environmental    field.     Obviously 
it  would  be  important. 

Morris:        That's   an   interesting  idea,    particularly   if  people  are  concerned, 
as  Ploughshares  is,    to  raise  the  level   of   debate  and  the 
visibility   of   the  debate. 

Sally  L:     Yes,   but  also  you  think  of   all   the  environmental   organizations — of 
course.    I  want  to  support  the  issue.     But  what  are  the  best 
movements,    the  best  organizations  that  are  doing  something  about 
trying  to  preserve — against  terrible   odds — the  world's 
environment.      And  how   do   I  know  which  are  the  most  effective? 

The  whole   game   of   philanthropy,    I   think,    is  very   individual. 
Someone  who's   serious  about   it  is  not  just  writing  checks  across 
the  board.      Yet  it's   so  hard  for  a   person  to  judge  whether   or  not 
an  organization  is   doing  a  good  job  and  whether  it's  the  most 
effective   thing  to   do. 

Hunger  is  a  similar  thing,    of   course.      I  usually  make  most  of 
my   gifts  to  Oxfam,   because   I've  happened  to  make  a   study   of  what 
group  I  think  does  the  best  in  that  field.      But   I  really  spend  a 
lot  of   time  on  it,  analyzing  these  things  and  talking  to  people 
about   it.    That's  what  foundations   do  after  all,    isn't  it?     But 
most  foundations   couldn't   do  that  for  you  as  an  individual. 

Morris:        Right.       In   fact,    that's  what   they   do  in  a  variety   of   fields  in 
order  to   do  their   grantmaking. 

Sally  L:     Yes.       So   I   think  it's  a  service   to  individuals,    which   is  really 
why  we   started. 


Continuity    and  Effective  Giving 


Sally  L:     The  other  point  is  this,    and  I   mentioned  it  at  the  outset — the 
thing  about  leaving  a  bequest.      If  you  wanted  to  leave  your 
money   to  alleviate  world  hunger,    say,    maybe  it  would  be  easier, 
because  there  are  institutions   that  have   proved  their   efficacy 
over  many   years'   time.      I  don't  know.      But   really   it  would  be 
better  to   give  it  to  a  foundation  that's   going  to  make  wise 
decisions  on  what's  most   effective  in  the  field  of  your   choice 
year  after  year. 

Morris:        Rather   than  giving  it   to  one   organization? 


164 


Sally  L:      They  might  get  a  terrible  board  of   directors  or   somebody  absconds 
with  the  money.     Who  knows?     You  could  give  money  to  a  community 
foundation,    except  that  they  are  all    over   the  lot  and  most   of   them 
don't  make   grants  outside   of   their  own  community. 

Morris:        Yes,    they  receive  money  from  any   sources,   but   they   also  respond  to 
many   things   in  the  community. 

Sally  L:     And  I   don't  like   the  local   community  foundation.      That's   where    I 
took  my   money   from   to  start  Ploughshares.      Before  then.    I  gave  my 
money   through   the  San  Francisco  Foundation.     But   if   I  weren't   alive 
to  say  exactly  where  that  money  should  go.    I  would  have  to  put  my 
trust  in  a  board  of   trustees  in  whose  judgment   I   don't  necessarily 
have  faith.      And  you  could  say   the  same  for  a  public  foundation  of 
the  kind  that   this  is.      Why   should  you  trust   this   board   of 
trustees?      Or  why   should  you  trust  the  next  generation  of 
trustees?      The  only  thing    is  you've  stated  the  exact  purposes   of 
your  bequest  very   tightly. 

Morris:       I  suppose  you  could  leave  a  lengthy  letter,    too,    about  what  you 
thought  about  the  role   of   the  board  and  what   sort   of   people   they 
should  be. 

Sally  L:      I   guess,    but  what  influence   could  you  have?      They   might  turn  the 
idea  on  its  head.      I'd  hate  to  serve  on  a  board  whose  activities 
and  point  of  view   was  governed  by  someone  no  longer  extant — 
someone  with  whom  you  could  not  reason  and  discuss.      And  what 
about   changing  times?      The  strength  and  the  purpose  of  a  community 
board  is  to  be  broad;  and   if   somebody  has  a  specific  area   that 
they  are  concerned  about,   whether  it  be  peace  or  health  or 
encouraging  young  artists,   one   could  specify   that  in  leaving  money 
to  a  community   foundation. 

But  as  I  said  before,    if  one  is  interested  in  a  national   or 
international   problem  one   can't  leave  one's  money  to  a   community 
foundation  and  have   control    on  how    it's  spent.      They   don't  make 
grants  that  way  unless  you  exactly   designate  it.      You  know  how   it 
works.    I'm  sure.      For  instance,    they   have   to  vote  whether  you  can 
give  your  money  to  even  such  national   organizations  as   the    [NAACP] 
Legal   and  Educational   Defense   Fund,    if   it  has  its  main  offices  in 
New  York.      It  has  to  be  approved  by   the  board.      When   my   first 
husband  died,    a  fund  was  set  up  for  him  from  which  to  make  grants 
in  the  field  of  what  was  then   called  "race  relations."     The 
directors  have  no  idea  how    to  give  money   outside    the  Bay  Area.      It 
is  not   their   business   to   do   so. 

Let's    say    that  your   main  area  of   concern  is   civil    rights  and 
you  believe   that  the  organization  which  has  most   impact  and 
responsible  history   is  the  Legal   Defense   Fund.      Even  so.    you  might 
not  want  your  money  to  be   distributed  to  it  after  your   death,   for 
even  the  best   of   organizations   do   not  necessarily   continue   in 


165 


Sally  L:      their  leadership  role  for  year  after  year.      In  the   six  years    since 
the  start  of   Ploughshares  we  have  seen  that  happen  in  the  arms- 
control  field  over  and  over  again.      And  what   could  one  expect  the 
distribution  committee  of  a  community   fund  to  do  in  that  case?      It 
doesn't  have  either  the  responsibility   or  the  knowledge   to   take 
your  bequest  away   from   one  organization  and  give  it  to  another 
that  is   currently   doing  better  work.      So  there  is  a  very   definite 
role  for  the  kind  of   foundation  that  Ploughshares  is. 


Women  and  Charitable  Giving 


Sally  L:      With  another  life  to  live  I  would  spend  a  lot  of   time 

prosylitiz  ing  women  about   taking  charge  of  their  own  resources  and 
making  their  own  philanthropic  decisions. 

Morris:        That's  what   the  Women's  Foundation  in  San  Francisco  has  been 
about. 

Sally  L:     Not  really.      It  raises  money  principally  from  women  for  women,   but 
it  is  raised  in  small  amounts  from  individuals  except  in 
exceptional    cases.      And.    of   course,    it  is  also  supported  by 
foundations.      I'm  talking  about  women  of  means  making  their  own 
choices  on  substantial   contributions.      Most  of   the  time,    even 
today,   women  leave  it  to  their  attorneys,    their  bankers,    their 
husbands  or  brothers  to  make   choices  in  charity.      I  sometimes 
laugh  bitterly  when  I  see  a  men's   gym  named  after  a  woman  —  or   some 
such.     Actually,    there  are  very  few  wealthy  women  who  decide  where 
their  money  should  go,  and  their  names  are  known  all   over  the 
country. 


Morris:        That's  true.      Does  that  go  back  to  how  women  have  been  educated? 

Sally  L:      That's  right.      Well,    I  sometimes   talk  about  that  a  little   bit.      It 
is  in  a   tiny,    teeny,    teeny,    teeny   way   that  I  am   a  role  model    in 
this  regard;    but  I  don't  have  a  fortune,    so  my  influence  is 
extremely   limited.      It   has  affected  some  people's  thinking  on  it. 
Because  why   shouldn't  a  woman  make  up  her  own  mind? 

Morris:        In  other  words,    in  speaking  to  organizations  —  ? 

Sally  L:      Or  more  frequently   in  speaking  to  individuals.      I  have  on  occasion 
been  asked  by   women  who  are  thinking  of   setting  up  a  foundation 
who  are  looking  for  suggestions  —     Obviously   I   can't  tell   them  how 
to  go  about   it,    but   the  thinking  that  —  yes,    how    to  think  about  it, 
that  it's  possible  to   do. 


166 


Morris:        And  the  trial  and  error  of   the  work. 

Sally  L:     That's   right,    and   to   do   it,    for  heaven's   sake,    rather   than  to  set 
up  a  lot  of  institutionalizing. 

Morris:  Amongst  your  own  personal  friends  and  acquaintances,  do  you  find 
that  more  women  are  beginning  to  think  in  terms  of  taking  charge 
of  their  own  inheritances  or  putting  a  word  into  their  husbands' 
thinking  about  what  to  do  with  the  family  assets? 

Sally  L:     The  people  that  I  know   socially  are  not  very  much  involved  in 

these  things,    oddly  enough,    or  those  that  are  involved  don't  have 
any    money.       So   it's   people   I've  met   through  Ploughshares,    and  I 
have  met  and  made  some  very  good  friends — people  who   do  have 
money.      And  we've  talked  about   it  a  lot,    and  I   think  some   of   them 
do- 
Morris:       And  their  consciousness  has  been  raised? 
Sally  L:     This  much    [holds  two  fingers   close  together].      Yes. 

Morris:       For  some  people  handling  money  is  as  complicated  as  trying  to 
prevent  nuclear  war,    I  think. 

Sally  L:     It  needn't  be.      But  why   is  it  complicated? 

Morris:        So  you  put  all  your  money   into  somebody's  recommendations  for 

stocks,    and  while  you're  out   playing  golf,    the  stock  market   falls 
on  its  face,   and  what  have  I   done  to  my   children? 

Sally  L:     Yes.    well,    that's   right.      That's   true.      Handling  money   in  that 

sense,    but  handling  money  from   the  point  of  view — but  you  wouldn't 
do  any  better,    except   if  you  slept  with   it  under  your  mattress, 
for  instance,    or  if  you  had   gotten  out  of   the   stock  market  as 
Sarah  Lawrence   did  four  days  before  the   crash. 

Morris:       Did  they?     How  clever. 

Sally  L:     I   didn't.      It   doesn't  matter.      Because    I   don't  handle   my   own 
financial   affairs. 

Morris:        But  you  can  spend  as  much   time   tracking  stocks  as  in  studying 
organizations   to   give  money   to. 

Sally  L:     Other   people   only   do    that.      Isn't   that   right?      Only   do   that. 

Only.    only,    only   do   that,    and  have  for  years.      Men  mostly.      But 
what   I'm   talking  about   is   deciding  how    to  give  away  your  money, 
not  how    to  invest  it.      Many   people  make   charity   a  very,  very 
complicated   issue.      And  I   don't   see  why   it   should  be   complicated, 
do  you? 


Mrs.  Lilienthal,  about  1968 

in  the  courtyard  of  her 

San  Francisco  home. 


167 


Morris:        No,      It  would  seem  to  be  something  that  would  come  from  the  heart 
and  be  worth   some   thought  and  consideration. 

Sally  L:      And  enjoyment.      It   should  be  a  pleasurable  activity,     don't  you 
think? 

Morris :        Thank  you  very  much. 
Sally  L:      Thank  you.      I  talked  your   ear  off. 
[End  of   interview] 


Transcriber:     Melanie  Moorhead 

Final   Typists:      Chris  Fenner,    Keiko  Sugimoto 


168 


TAPE  GUIDE  —  Sally  Lllienthal 


Interview  1:  August  17,  1987 
tape  1,  side  A 
tape  1,  side  B 
tape  2,  side  A 
tape  2,  side  B 

Interview  2:  August  27,  1987 
tape  3,  side  A 
tape  3,  side  B 
tape  4,  side  A 
tape  4,  side  B 

Interview  3:   September  29,  1987 
tape  5,  side  A 
tape  5,  side  B 
tape  6,  side  A 
tape  6,  side  B 

Interview  4:  October  13,  1987 
tape  7,  side  A 
tape  7,  side  B 
tape  8,  side  A  [side  B  not  recorded] 

Interview  5:  November  12,  1987 
tape  9,  side  A 
tape  9,  side  B 
tape  10,  side  A 
tape  10,  side  B 
tape  11,  side  A  [side  B  not  recorded] 


1 
1 

10 
19 
29 

31 
31 
40 
49 
51 

56 
56 
66 
76 

87 

96 

96 

104 

115 

126 
126 
135 
145 
155 
165 


APPENDIX 


Brief  biography 

"Ploughshares'  never-ending  crusade,"  Caroline  Drewes, 

San  Francisco  Sunday  Examiner  &  Chronicle.  November  10,  1985    170 
"Peace:  A  Role  for  Philanthropy,"  Sally  Lilienthal, 

Women  and  Foundations /Corporate  Philanthropy, 

Spring /Summer  1986  172 

"World  Class,  Sally  Lilienthal:   Turning  swords  into 

ploughshares,"  Albert  Haas,  Jr.,  San  Francisco  Magazine, 

July  1987  17A 


169 


March  1987  Further  Information: 


Shahnaz  Taplin  (415)  931-4613 
Maureen  Anderson  (415)  775-2244 

Sally  Lilienthal 

Sally  Lilienthal  is  President  and  founder  of  the  Ploughshares 
Fund,  a  public  grantmaking  foundation  dedicated  to  preventing 
nuclear  war  through  arms  control  leading  to  -disarmament.   In  1986 
the  foundation  disbursed  $904,000  to  105  groups  and  individuals 
working  toward  global  security.   Since  its  founding  in  1981, 
Ploughshares  has  made  grants  of  over  $2,500,000. 

Mrs.  Lilienthal  founded  the  San  Francisco  Museum  of  Modern  Art 
Rental  Gallery  at  Fort  Mason  in  1978  and  served  as  its  director 
until  1983.   She  was  a  professional  sculptor  for  fifteen  years 
and  has  served  on  the  San  Francisco  Arts  Commission  and  the  board 
of  the  San  Francisco  Art  Institute.   In  1984  the  Art  Institute 
awarded  her  an  honorary  doctorate  for  her  work  in  championing  the 
rights  of  artists.   For  fifteen  years  she  has  served  as  a  trustee 
of  the  San  Francisco  Museum  of  Modern  Art. 

In  1973_  Lilienthal  was  acting  Chair  of  Amnesty  International/USA, 
after  five"  years  as  national  Vice  Chair,  and  for  seven  years  she 
served  as  the  coordinator  of  the  Western  regional  office  in  San 
Francisco. 

Lilienthal  was  on  the  board  of  the  Northern  California  American 
Civil  Liberties  Union,  and  was  founder  and  Chair  of  the  Northern 
California  Coiunittee  of  the  NAACP  Legal  Defense  and  Education 
Fund  from  1971-1977. 

She  has  also  served  on  the  boards  of  the  Women's  Campaign  Fund, 
the  San  Francisco  Bar  Association  Foundation,  and  Sarah  Lawrence 
College,  and  is  currently  on  the  board  of  the  Center  for 
International  Policy. 

Lilienthal  received  an  award  for  Exceptional  Commitment  to 
Working  for  Social  Change  from  the  National  Organization  for 
Women  in  1985,  and  the  Phoebe  Apperson  Hearst  Distinguished  Woman 
award  in  1965. 

Mrs.  Lilienthal  v/as  born  in  1919  in  Portland,  Oregon  and  has 
lived  in  San  Francisco  for  more  than  fifty  years.   She  graduated 
from  Sarah  Lawrence  College  in  1940  and  is  the  mother  of  five 
children. 


Ploughshares  Fund 

Fort  Mason,  San  Francisco,  Ca.  94123 
415/775-2244 


170 


Ploughshares'  never-ending  crusade 


It's  a  'United  Way'  for  the 
world  disarmament  movement 


By  Caroline  Drewet 
or  nc  EXAMVCR  STAFF 


APOINTILIST  painting  of  an  infinite  sea,  a 
sea  without  any  horizon,  covers  one  wall  of 
Sally  Ulienthal's  offices  at  Fort  Mason.  The 
work,  by  Tom  Smith,  has  movement,  a 
timeless  quality.  One  might,  in  a  flight  of 
fancy,  step  into  the  painting,  immerse  oneself  in  the 
swells  that  must  go  on  forever  —  as,  indeed.  Sally 
Lilienthal  has  immersed  herself  in  the  endless  work 
that  is  done  here  in  these  rooms,  work  that  must  go  on 
forever.  The  presence  of  the  painting  is  symbolic. 

She  is  tall,  with  narrow  bones  and  luminous  gray 
eyes.  A  woman  of  passion,  purpose  and,  one  suspects, 
limited  patience,  Sally  Lilienthal  is  the  founder  and 
president  of  Ploughshares,  a  publicly  supported  chan 
uble  foundation  established  four  years  ago  to  build  a 
constituency  of  donors  concerned  with  world  security 
and  the  avoidance  of  a  nuclear  holocaust. 

The  fund  is  unique,  those  involved  believe  it  is  an 
idea  that  has  never  been  implemented  before.  It  is  also, 
its  founder  has  always  felt,  a  little  difficult  to  explain. 
Ploughshares  is  not  a  grass  roots  effort;  it  is  once 
removed  from  action.  "We  fund,  we  don't  do."  she 
points  out.  "We  are  also  the  first  foundation  to  focus 
solely  on  the  prevention  of  nuclear  war,  on  this  single 
issue.  Ploughshares  to  pledged  to  peace  for  perpetu 
ity." 

Functioning  much  like  the  United  Way,  the  fund 
receives  donations  and  disburses  grants  to  theoretical, 
technological,  educational  and  legislative  projects. 

Grants  have  ranged  from  $500  to  Alexander  Sakha- 
rov  for  an  article  analyzing  the  Soviet  withdrawal 
from  the  Olympic  Games  to  $100,000  for  a  two-year 
examination  of  the  means  of  verifying  compliance 
with  arms  agreements. 

Ploughshares  supported  this  year's  meetings  of 
American  astronauts  and  Soviet  cosmonauts  to  discuss 
joint  peaceful  space  exploration.  A  grant  paid  last 
year's  airfare  for  Yale  University  students  attempting 
to  resume  an  ongoing  exchange  with  Moscow  Univer 
sity  after  a  20-year  lapse. 

Sally  Ulienthal's  diplomacy  is  also  personal.  On 
Nov.  19  and  20,  she  will  attend  the  summit  meeting  in 
Geneva  as  the  only  San  Francisco  member  of  a  private 
diplomatic  delegation  called  Women  for  a  Meaningful 
Summit.  (Among  others  are  Coretta  Scott  King,  Bella 
Abzug  and  actress  Jane  Alexander). 

The  coalition  has  requested  formal  meetings  with 
the  heads  of  state,  with  Nancy  Reagan  and  Raisa 
Gorbachev.  Its  primary  purpose,  consistent  with  the 
work  of  Ploughshares,  will  be  to  urge  both  countries  to 
negotiate  a  comprehensive  nuclear  test  ban  treaty. 

Lilienthal  started  her  fund  with  such  local  leaders 
as  William  Matson  Roth  and  Lewis  Butler,  former 
_  assistant  secretary  of  Health,  Education  and  Welfare. 
r  «nd  such  experts  on  international  affairs  as  former 


Salty  Ullenthal  co-founded  Ploughshares  In  1081  to  fund  peace  projects 


—  Please  see  PEACE.  S-4 


171 


PEACE 

—  From  S-1 


t 

-• 

• 

- 

•• 


diplomat  John  Stewart  Service,  and 
Nobel  Prize-winning  physicist  Ow 
en  Chamberlain.  George  Kennan, 
of  the  Institute  for  Advanced  Study 
in  Princeton,  and  onetime  ambassa 
dor  to  the  Soviet  Union,  assumed  an 
active  role  when  he  became  the 
first  of  the  fund's  distinguished  list 
of  advisers. 

During  its  brief  life,  the  organi 
zation  has  been  increasingly  effec 
tive.  In  1981-82,  Ploughshares  had 
62  donors  and  awarded  29  grants, 
totalling  $150,000.  At  the  end  of  the 
fourth  fiscal  year,  there  have  been 
950  donors  and  86  grants,  totalling 
$625,672. 

"Until  Ploughshares,  there  has 
been  no  way  for  the  average  person 
to  determine  which  group  or  indi 
vidual  in  the  field  of  arms  control  is 
the  most  effective,"  Lilien thai  says. 

She  feels  this  is  her  foundation's 
major  accomplishment  "Everyone 
is  afraid  of  nuclear  war  or  accident 
But  people  are  confused  about 
what  to  do.  We  have  been  able  to 
provide  one  very  real  way  for  indi 
viduals  to  know  their  dollars  arc 
being  used  most  effectively." 

The  name  Ploughshares  was  sug 
gested  by  one  of  her  five  children. 
It  is  from  Isaiah.  "They  shall  beat 
their  swords  into  ploughshares,  and 
their  spears  into  pruning-hooks;  na 
tion  shall  not  lift  up  sword  against 
nation,  neither  shall  they  learn  war 
anymore." 

Sally  was  graduated  from  Sarah 


Lawrence  and,  during  World  War 
II,  worked  for  the  Office  of  War 
Information  in  the  China  depart 
ment  Her  immediate  superior, 
New  Yorker  Philip  Lilienthal,  had 
been  her  first  love  and  she,  his.  A 
long,  long  time  later,  after  both  had 
lost  spouses  through  death,  he  was 
to  become  her  third  husband.  Then, 
after  14  years  of  marriage  to  each 
other,  Phil  Lilienthal  died  of  cancer 
a  year  and  a  half  ago. 

Intense,  determined  and  yet 
with  a  lighthearted  side  and  a  reti 
cent  side  —  she  says  she  simply 
cannot  make  a  speech  —  Sally  Lil 
ienthal  is  one  of  those  people  with 
the  lovely  ability  to  pick  up  and  go 
on.  She  has  a  sense  of  purpose,  she 
knows  who  she  is  and  what  must  be 
done. 

And  what  a  career  she  has  had. 
Art  and  social  change,  civil  rights 
and  human  rights,  have  been  the 
strong  threads  in  her  life.  She  has 
been1  vastly  effective  in  both 
worlds,  while  protesting  that  she 
has  had  no  real  "expertise." 

She  was  a  serious  sculptor  until 
15  years  ago,  when  she  gave  it  up  to 
concentrate  on  Amnesty  Interna 
tional/USA,  becoming  vice  chair 
man  of  that  organization.  Seven 
years  ago,  she  started  the  San  Fran 
cisco  Museum  of  Modern  Art's 
Rental  Gallery  at  Fort  Mason.  Last 
year,  the  Art  Institute  awarded  her 
an  honorary  doctorate  for  her  work 
in  championing  the  rights  of  artists. 

Her  contributions  are  much, 
much  more.  But  In  Ploughshares 
she  has  found  the  ultimate  cause. 
What  else,  she  asks,  is  there? 


jExaminer  *    *  * 

A  section  of  the  San  Francisco  Sunday  Examiner  &  Chronicle/  Sunday,  November  10,  1985  /SECTION 


GUEST  ARTICLE 

PEACE:  A  ROLE  FOR 
PHILANTHROPY 

SALLY  LILIENTHAL. 
TRUSTEE 
PLOUGHSHARES  FUND 


Editor's  note  Sally  Lihenthal's  article  was  adapted 
from  her  presentation  to  WAF/CP's  ninth  annual 
meeting. 

I  think  I  have  never  met  a  woman  who 
goes  through  one  day  ol  her  life  without 
thinking  about  the  threat  of  nuclear  extinc 
tion.  But  the  average  woman  may  push  back 
the  fear  because  she  feels  she  cannot  do 
anything  about  it.  She  has  been  conned  into 
thinking  that,  because  she  is  not  a  tech 
nologist  and  because  she  is  emotional  about 
the  destruction  of  the  human  race,  she  can 
not  deal  with  the  abstruse  problems  of  world 
security.  Military  strategists  cannot  be 
emotional. 

What  can  we  do,  then,  if  we  are  not  so- 
called  experts?  Experts  in  this  field,  I  would 
remind  you,  are  99  percent  male  Congress- 
woman  Pat  Schroeder  recently  said:  "the 
military  establishment  only  defines  as  experts 
those  people  who  agree  with  them."  The  fact 
is  we  are  made  to  think  that  if  we  are  not  tech 
nologists  —  whatever  that  means  —  we  can 
not  deal  with  the  problems  of  world  security; 
that  only  technologists  know  the  real  facts 
about  weapons  systems  and  facts  about  mili 
tary  strategy.  I  urge  you  not  to  accept  that 
viewpoint.  Wars  are  about  conflict,  not  about 
laser  beams,  not  even  about  throw  weights. 
Conflict  resolution  is  of  interest  to  many  foun 
dations  today  in  the  management  of  all  kinds 
of  disputes. 

Conflict  between  nations  is  usually  based 
on  political  differences.  The  deep  conflict  be- 


172 

tween  ourselves  and  the  Soviet  Union  is 
political,  not  technological.  Social,  economic 
and  ethical  differences  cause  our  hostile  dis 
cord,  not  the  arms  themselves.  Do  we  as 
women  know  as  much  about  society,  about 
economics  and  ethics  as  male  experts?  I  do 
not  think  I  have  to  argue  that  point  to  women 
and  men  in  philanthropy. "". 

There  are  many  opportunities  for  women 
to  take  personal  responsibility  for  helping  to 
avoid  nuclear  war  and  to  make  their  work 
count  in  the  struggle  to  end  the  threat  of 
nuclear  war.  There  are  many  organizations 
and  alliances  that  need  both  followers  and 
leaders.  Also,  there  are  opportunities  that  do 
not  depend  on  organizations,  but  are  acti 
vated  by  an  individual's  personal  energy 
together  with  her  identity  as  a  woman  either 
socially  or  professionally.  Indeed,  many  of  the 
most  active  and  effective  spokeswomen  in 
this  field  use  their  professional  base  as  the 
instrument  for  leadership.  Helen  Caldicott 
speaks  as  a  pediatrician.  Barbara  Wiedner, 
with  a  large  following  among  elders,  speaks 
as  a  grandmother  from  Sacramento,  Cali 
fornia.  Joan  Boakaer  speaks  to  moms  and 
dads  all  over  the  country  as  a  former  teacher 
and  she  is  one  of  many.  Jane  Alexander  and 
Joanne  Woodward  command  audiences 
and  the  press  because  they  are  well  known 
actresses  who  use  their  professional  skills  in 
pleading  for  peace.  You  do  not  have  to  be 
a  scientist  or  strategist  like  Ruth  Adams,  Anne 
Cahn  or  Randall  Forsberg.  or  a  Congress- 
person  like  Barbara  Boxer  to  do  something 
significant. 

If  you  are  not  a  physicist,  a  trained  political 
scientist  or  a  member  of  Congress,  there  is 
a  profession  you  could  choose  as  a  base 
from  which  to  have  an  impact.  That  is,  of 
course,  our  profession,  philanthropy.  We 
have  the  power  as  members  of  the  founda 
tion  world  that  is  given  to  few  other  women. 
We  can  contribute  to  changa  That  is  our 
mandata 


"It  >-OUNDATION  CCNttb 
312  SUTTEH  STREET.  ~c  CLOOP 
SAN  FRANCI6CO  OA     94106 
about  supporting  research  and  public  educ 
tion  on  the  dumping  of  nuclear  waste?  Since 
the  1940s,  over  45  million  cubic  feet  of  radio 
active  landfills  near  nuclear  test  sites  and 
near  research  and  manufacturing  facilities 
are  major  hazards  to  people  living  nearby. 
Cancer  and  birth  defects  are  considerations, 
too,  for  foundations  involved  with  public 
health  that  probably  are  not  set  up  to  fund 
anti-war  programs  per  sa 

Dedicated  to  doing  good  in  the  public  in 
terest,  with  your  mandate  to  help  the  poor 
and  disadvantaged:  is  your  foundation  con 
cerned,  for  instance,  about  the  29  percent 
cut  in  the  school  lunch  program?  When  you 
protest  the  cut  in  support  for  the  handi 
capped  or  the  welfare  mother,  you  and  your 
directors  are  not  overtly  working  within  the 
peace  movement,  but  you  are  responding 
to  the  human  cost  of  military  expenditures. 
The  welfare  mother's  life  may  well  depend 
on  a  miniscule  technological  decision  or 
whim  about  Star  Wars  and  its  funding.  In 
1986,  27  percent  of  total  federal  outlays  was 
spent  on  national  defense.  Five  years  from 
now,  one-third  of  all  federal  outlays  may  go 
to  defense.  What  will  that  do  to  human 
services? 

Working  in  a  foundation  you  might  ask: 
"what  can  I  do  when  my  foundation  or  insti 
tution  eschews  politics  and  does  not  support 
advocacy  as  such?"  Just  as  you  did  with 
other  national  problems,  you  can  provide 
citizens  with  resources  to  form  and  act  on 
their  own  judgements  about  military  spend 
ing.  It  is  your  traditional  policy  to  inform  the 
citizenry,  which,  after  all,  is  the  engine  that 
drives  public  policy  fueled  by  your  dollars  for 
your  own  humane  purposes. 

/  wonder  how  many  foundations  here  give 
grants  to  education  in  the  belief  that  children, 
if  they  survive,  should  be  prepared  at  school 
and  at  home  for  the  problems  of  a  nuclear 
world?  We  support  teacher  training  and  cur 
riculum  development.  We  help  teachers  to 


loughshare*  has  only  one  mission.  Its  one  fund- 
Ing  program  Is  arms  control  leading  to  disarmament.  It  Is 
not  woman's  rights,  but  we  would  be  falling  our  contribu 
tors  and  be  delinquent  In  our  duties  If  we  did  not  seek  to 
support  the  women  of  this  country  for  their  potential  force 
has  not  been  adequately  tapped. 


Foundations  as  institutions  tend  to  deal 
with  the  world  as  if  it  were  a  pre-nuclear 
world.  They  deal  with  problems  of  health  and 
poverty  as  if  the  nuclear  bomb  had  no  bear 
ing  on  these  issues.  Peace  is  considered 
politics,  politics  is  not,  yet  the  two  are  inex 
tricably  entwined. 

What  I  suggest  to  you  are  not  peace  is 
sues  per  sa  but  money  spent  wisely  on 
grants  in  your  program  area  that  would  have 
an  effect  on  slowing  the  arms  raca  In  giving 
you  only  a  few  examples.  I  am' sure  you  will 
think  of  others  that  more  closely  fit  your  foun 
dation. 

First,  foundations  that  give  grants  to 
reserve  and  enhance  the  environment:  how 


encourage  school  boards,  both  state  and 
local,  to  include  nuclear  subjects  in  the  cur 
riculum.  We  have  supported  the  develop 
ment  of  packets  prepared  for  school  children 
about  Russian  history  and  culture  and  me 
distribution  of  educational  films  and  slide 
shows.  And  what  about  student  aid9  That  if 
certainly  of  concern  to  most  foundations  Un 
der  Gramm-Rudman  that  is  being  pulled  way 
back  in  order  to  fund  the  military,  another  ex 
ample  of  the  human  cost  of  nuclear  weapons 

CONTINUED  ON  PAGE  6 


Hf/ 


173 


PEACE:  A  ROLE  FOR 
PHILANTHROPY 

CONTINUED  FROM  PAGE  3 

that  must  be  of  concern  to  philanthropists. 
Here  I  would  like  to  tell  you  briefly  what 
Ploughshares  is  doing  to  specifically  expand 
the  efforts  of  women  toward  nuclear  dis 
armament. 

Last  year  we  started  a  program  called 
"Women's  Leadership  Development."  Toward 
this  program  we  allotted  14  percent  of  our 
total  budget.  Let  me  mention  a  few  of  the 
grants. 

There  has  been  considerable  interest  in  a 
group  called  Women  for  a  Meaningful  Sum 
mit  which  took  35  women  to  Geneva.  There, 
by  good  fortune,  we  had  a  meeting  with 
General  Secretary  Gorbachev.  I  think  this 
grant  actually  did  help  to  develop  women's 
leadership.  Many  of  us  have  had  a  fresh  op 
portunity  to  tell  people  that,  as  women,  we 
insist  that  our  government  negotiate  in  a 
serious  manner. 

We  made  a  grant  to  Women,  USA  to  sup 
port  a  media  professional  to  create  speak 
ing  and  writing  opportunities  for  women 
listed  in  a  new  and  growing  directory  of 
women  foreign  policy  specialists.  We  en 
courage  proposals  from  all  over  the  United 
States  and  abroad  to  find  relatively  undis 
covered  talent.  A  recent  example  is  Marilyn 
Waring,  a  former  member  of  the  New 
Zealand  Parliament.  She  brought  down  her 
government  with  one  vote  over  the  policy  of 
harboring  nuclear  armed  ships  in  New 
Zealand.  Currently,  she  is  on  an  extensive 
campus  tour  in  this  country. 

We  fund  both  the  political  work  and  the 
media  investigation  done  by  Women's  Action 
for  Nuclear  Disarmament  (W.A.N.D.).  Today, 
W.A.N.D.  is  as  strong  as  any  membership 
group  in  the  field  of  arms  control  and 
probably  as  influential  as  any  in  dealing  with 
Congress. 

We  fund  Peace  Links,  the  group  started  by 
Betty  Bumpers  with  the  help  of  90  other  Con 
gressional  wives.  "Be  a  good  citizen,  be  a 
patriot  and  wake  up,"  says  Bumpers.  With  this 
pitch  she  has  stirred  to  action  members  of 
garden  clubs,  Junior  Leagues  and  profes 
sional  clubs,  particularly  in  the  Southern 
United  States.  Last  winter  we  funded  the 
travel  of  mainstream  Soviety  women  who 
visited  their  counterparts  in  Southern  com 
munities  with  Peace  Links  acting  as  hostess. 


J  here  are  many  op 
portunities  for  women  to 
take  personal  responsibility 
for  helping  to  avoid  nuclear 
war  and  to  make  their  work 
count  In  the  struggle  to  end 
the  threat  of  nuclear  war. 


WRLTOASS 


BY  ALBERT  HAAS,  JR. 


Sally  Lilienthal:  Turning  swords  Into  ploughshares 


When       Ronald 
Reagan      and 
Mikhail  Cor- 
bachev     held 
their  first  sum 
mit  meeting  in 
Geneva  in  November  1985, 
Sally  Lilienthal  was  there.  As 
one  of  a  small  group  of  Amer 
ican  women  who  made  up  an 
unofficial  delegation,  she  had 
a  forty-five  minute  meeting  with 
Gorbachev. 

When  Reagan  and  Gor- 
bachev  met  at  Reykjavik  last 
October,  Lilienthal  was  pres 
ent  again.  While  the  summit 
was  a  failure,  it  had  a  positive 
effect  on  her  Ploughshares 
Fund,  the  United  Way  of  the 
peace  movement. 

Founded  in  the  living  room 
of  Lilienthal's  Pacific  Heights 
home  in  1981,  the  Plough 
shares  Fund  is  a  publicly  sup- 
ported  foundation  that  calls  for 
arms  control  leading  to  nu 
clear  disarmament.  Since  the 
Iceland  impasse,  Plough- 
shares'  efforts  to  provide  money 
to  groups  working  to  wind  down 
the  nuclear  arms  race  has  re 
ceived  increasing  national  response.  Be- 
cause  only  one  percent  of  the  philanthropic 
dollar  is  thought  to  be  going  toward  pre- 
venting  nuclear  war,  the  relatively  small 
Ploughshares  has  become  one  of  the  big 
players.  And  its  potential  is  enormous. 

But  what's  a  socially  prominent,  wealthy 
San  Francisco  woman,  with  easy  access 
to  countless  pleasant  and  personally  re 
warding  civic  activities,  doing  in  the 
vanguard  of  the  peace  movement?  Didn't 
former  Chief  of  Staff  Donald  Regan  sug 
gest  that  the  average  woman  cares  more 
ubuul  diamonds  than  social  issues? 

Lilienthal.  sixty-eight,  says  that  women 
are  far  more  concerned  and  informed  about 
the  need  lo  avoid  a  nuclear  holocaust 
than  many  men  realize.  The  experts  — 
virtually  all  men  —  who  plan  nuclear  war 
strategy  may  impress  one  another  with 
the  irrhiKMTdiir  jargon  they  pass  bock 
ami  lurid  across  the  lunch  table.  Ixit  one 
•lor*  not  need  to  l>e  a  technocrat  lo  deal 
with  wiirUI  security.  "Wars  arr  alxiul  run- 


.    1 


flict,"  Lilienthal  says,  "not  about  laser 
beams,  not  even  about  'throw  weights.'  " 

Ploughshares  Fund,  she  says,  is  the 
most  important  cause  she  has  ever  un 
dertaken.  "It  always  bothered  me  that 
my  participation  in  the  peace  movement 
had  been  confined  to  providing  financial 
support."  Through  Ploughshares.  Lilien 
thal  is  proving  that  when  informed,  highly 
qualified  men  and  women  team  up  to  do 
something,  even  something  as  difficult 
as  working  for  nuclear  disarmament,  big 
things  can  happen. 

Lilienthal's  role  in  whatever  she  un 
dertakes  is  never  passive.  Lawyer  Wil 
liam  Coblentz  remembers  working  with 
her  at  the  Northern  California  Commit 
tee,  which  raises  money  to  support  the 
NAACP  Legal  Defense  Fund,  during  the 
late  seventies.  "When  Sally  makes  up 
her  mind  lo  do  something,  she  really 
sinks  her  (eeth  into  it.  Like  a  bulldog." 
Then  he  adds  what  others  say  in  one  way 
or  another.  "She  has  an  audilorv  s 


all  right,  but  sometimes  she 
turns  it  off."  Lilienthal  readily 
admits  that  she  can  be  impa 
tient,  even  blunt.  She  sets  high 
standards  for  herself  and  oth 
ers.  With  a  low  tolerance  for 
mediocre  performances,  she 
does  not  suffer  fools  gladly. 

She  is,  however,  original  and 
creative  in  her  endeavors.  Her 
commitment  to  Ploughshares 
was  nationally  recognized  in 
March  when  she  won  the 
$10,000  Robert  W.  Scrivner 
Award  from  the  Council  on 
Foundations  during  its  annual 
meeting.  The  award  is  made 
to  the  leader,  chosen  from 
among  1.800  foundation  lead 
ers,  who  responded  most  cre 
atively  to  an  important  social 
problem.  Lilienthal  says  she 
will  use  the  money  for  her  first 
trip  to  the  Soviet  Union,  where 
she  will  discuss  global  secu 
rity  matters  from  a  bilateral 
point  of  view. 

"So  many  people  are  scared 
to  death  about  what's  happen 
ing,  but  haven't  known  what 
to  do  about  it."  Lilienthal  says. 
"Until  Ploughshares,  there  was 
no  way  for  the  average  person  to  deter 
mine  which  groups  or  individuals  in  the 
field  of  arms  control  were  the  most  effec 
tive.  We  perform  that  function.  We  give 
people  the  chance  to  support  vision 
grounded  in  reality." 

Ploughshares'  board  of  directors  and 
its  separate  group  of  advisers  are  uncom 
monly  qualified,  with  some  of  the  most 
prominent  Bay  Area  figures  among  them. 
The  fourteen  board  members  include 
Owen  Chamberlain.  Nobel  laureate 
Berkeley  physicist:  William  \latson  Roth, 
developer  of  Chirardel I i  Square:  and  Lewis 
H.  Butler,  chair  of  (he  board,  and  former 
assistant  secretary  of  Health.  Education 
and  Welfare.  Ploughshares'  twenty-three 
advisers  include  Glenn  Seaburg.  former 
chairman  of  the  Atomic  Energy  Com 
mission  and  former  chancellor  of  LC 
Berkeley;  Rolxrrt  Guheen.  former  pre»i- 
ilenl  of  Princeton  University:  and  John 
Stewart  Service,  a  career  diplomat. 

i.n\TIM  t.lin\  I'v.t.  "I 


'"> 


-tN  IX  \M   !•«  II  Ull.l/IM    II  II    H7 


WORLD  CLASS 


CO\TI\LKl)  I- RIM  PMK  <M 

"Sally's  an  inspiration  to  all  of  us," 
says  Chamberlain.  "It's  hard  not  to  do 
as  much  as  we  can  when  she  does  so 
much.  Ploughshares  has  become  much 
more  important  than  any  of  us  realized 
at  the  beginning."  Lewis  Butler  agrees. 
"I  never  dreamed  it  would  become  a  na 
tional  institution,"  he  says.  "And  Sally 
is  90  percent  of  the  reason." 

The  Ploughshares  Fund  received  its 
name  from  a  suggestion  made  by  Lilien- 
thal's  eldest  son,  Tom,  who  borrowed  the 
phrase  "and  they  shall  beat  their  swords 
into  ploughshares"  from  Isaiah  2:4. 
Ploughshares  rents  its  $650-a-month 
headquarters  in  an  appropriate  place — 
in  the  cultural  center  at  Fort  Mason,  a 
former  military  installation. 

Money  from  contributors  is  used  to  fund 
Ploughshares'  goals,  not  for  administra 
tive  and  fundraising  costs.  Until  last  No 
vember,  when  Ploughshares  was  awarded 
a  8250,000,  three-year  grant  for  devel 
opment  and  expansion  from  the  John  D. 
and  Catherine  T.  MacArthur  Foundation 
of  Chicago,  all  such  expenses  were  paid 
for  by  one  donon  It  is  widely  believed 
that  the  donor  was  Lilienthal.  Lewis  But 
ler  says,  "Sally  gives  personally  far  be 
yond  any  possible  tax  benefits.  She's  a 
living  testament  to  putting  your  money 
where  your  mouth  is."  During  Plough 
shares'  early  days,  and  even  quite  re 
cently,  Lilienthal  sold  part  of  her  art 
collection  to  raise  money. 

Ploughshares  now  has  1,800  contrib 
utors  nationwide,  twice  the  number  of 
1986.  They  cross  political  lines;  some 
are  Reaganite  Republicans  who  have  split 
with  the  president  on  his  nuclear  arms 
policies.  Ken  Smith  of  Graver.  Mathews, 


LOUGHSHARES  HAS 
ALREADY  PUT  $2.5 
MILLION  INTO  THE  PEACE 
MOVEMENT 

Smith  &  Company  (the  country's  premier 
direct   mail   fundraiser  for  progressive 
nonprofit  causes)  says  he  has  worked  with  1 
hundreds  of  nonprorhs,  a  number  of  them 
in  the  antinuclear  field.  "Ploughshares  j 
is  special,"  he  says.  "It's  usually  hard   ! 
to  get  people  to  give  to  organizations  that 
function   as   a   clearinghouse   for  other 
groups.  This  is  a  kind  of  mutual  fund  for 
givers." 


Ploughshares  has  already  put  $2.5 
million  into  the  peace  movement.  During 
its  first  year,  1981-82,  Ploughshares  made 
grants  of  about  $150,000.  In  1986, 
Ploughshares  made  105  grants  totaling 
$904,000,  and  this  year  it  hopes  to  award 
over  $1  million.  Last  yeac  donations  from 
three  individuals  accounted  for  an  ag 
gregate  of  $240,000,  and  foundations 
provided  20  percent  of  the  total  funding. 

The  fund  receives  more  than  five  re 
quests  for  each  grant  it  awards.  Some  of 
the  larger  grants  have  gone  to  Citizens 
Against  Nuclear  Wai;  Professionals'  Co 
alition  for  Nuclear  Arms  Control,  and  the 
Better  World  Society.  In  addition, 
Ploughshares  sponsored  two  of  its  own 
projects:  the  production  and  distribution 
of  briefing  packets  about  nuclear  testing, 
and  the  distribution  of  a  booklet  con 
cerning  the  SALT  II  Treaty  to  the  press 
and  members  of  Congress. 

The  largest  grant  to  date  ($107,000) 
was  awarded  in  May  1986  to  the  Natural 
Resources  Defense  Council,  which  sent 
a  team  of  American  scientists  to  install 
and  monitor  seismometers  around  the  So 
viet  nuclear  testing  site  at  Semipala- 
tinsk,  about  1,800  miles  south  of  Moscow. 

George  F.  Ken  nan,  former  U.S.  am 
bassador  to  the  Soviet  Union  and  a 
Ploughshares  advisee  considers  that  grant 
particularly  important.  He  says  that 
Ploughshares  "deserves  support  because 
its  work  is  so  significant,  and  because 
it's  not  too  big  like  other  foundations  that 
get  bogged  down  in  bureaucracy.  This 
administration's  position  is  so  specious. 
The  goverment  is  officially  blind.  It's  lit 
tle  understood  that  we  are  dealing  with 
other  human  beings  when  we  talk  to  the 
Soviets." 

Understanding  how  Sally  Lilienthal 
came  to  be  the  woman  who  is  leading 
the  Ploughshares  Fund  to  national  prom 


inence  requires  knowing  a  bit  about  her 
conservative  upbringing  and  about  the 
years  she  spent  in  San  Francisco  during 
World  War  II.  "My  father  let  me  know 
that  if  he  caught  me  voting  for  FDR,  I 
could  look  somewhere  else  to  live,"  she 
says.  "And  there  was  some  kind  of  mes 
sage  in  my  family  that  'doing  good'  was 
somehow  naughty." 

Bom  to  a  wealthy  Portland,  Oregon 
family,  Lilienthal  moved  to  San  Francisco 
with  her  family  when  she  was  twelve. 
Brought  up  by  governesses,  she  attended 
Burke  School,  then  public  schools  before 
going  on  to  Sarah  Lawrence  College.  "I 
was  kicked  out  of  Burke 's  for  writing  the 
definition  of  a  dirty  word  on  a  note  and 
passing  it  to  a  friend,"  she  says,  smiling. 

At  Sarah  Lawrence.  Lilienthal  ma 
jored  in  creative  writing,  and  after  grad 
uation  in  1940  she  went  to  work  in  the 
China  Department  of  the  Office  of  War 
Information  (OWI)  in  San  Francisco.  At 
OWI  she  remet  Philip  Lilienthal,  her 
first  college  sweetheart;  she  later  married 
him  in  1969.  (Philip  Lilienthal  served 
as  associate  director  of  the  University  of 
California  Press  and  died  of  cancer  in 
1984.) 

Lilienthal  was  the  mother  of  five  young  j 
children  when  her  first  husband,  attorney  ! 
Tom  Cohen,  died  in  1953.  After  his  death, 
she  embarked  on  a  career  as  a  sculptor, 
art  collector,  and  art  supporter,  serving 
on  the  San  Francisco  Arts  Commission. 
With  Marian  Parmenter.  she  revived  the 
San  Francisco  Museum  of  Modern  Art 
rental  gallery  at  Fort  Mason,  located  near 
Ploughshares'  office,  one  of  the  oldest 
and  largest  rental  galleries  in  the  coun 
try..  In  1955  she  married  George  Hellyer. 
an  attorney,  and  the  marriage  ended  in 
divorce  in  1963. 

Although  she  has  not  created  any  work 
in  recent  vears.  Lilienthal.  trained  as  a 


WORLD  CLASS 


176 


sculptor  at  the  San  Francisco  Art  Insti 
tute  (then  called  the  California  School  of 
Fine  Arts),  is  not  a  dilettante.  San  Fran 
cisco  sculptor  Richard  Mayer  recalls  her 
as  **a  serious  artist  whose  work  was  shown 
and  collected." 

Michael  S.  Bell,  curator  of  Visual  Arts 
Access,  says  Lilienthal  was  "among  an 
interesting  group  of  San  Francisco  artists 
who  were  pioneers  in  the  visual  arts  like 
Mary  Keesling,  Grace  Morley,  and  Margy 
Boyd.  who  made  things  happen  in  con 
temporary  art  here."  He  also  remembers 
her  for  other  reasons.  "When  she  takes 
a  stand,  it's  for  a  good  reason ."  Bell  says. 
"And  she  can  be  salty.  She  doesn't  have 
to  put  up  with  any  crap  from  anyone,  and 
she  doesn't." 

Lilienthal  says  her  commitment  to  pro 
gressive  causes  is  not  merely  a  reaction 
to  her  childhood.  She  began  "doing  good" 
when  she  discovered  that  well-educated, 
affluent  Chinese,  who  were  coworkers  with 
her  at  OWI  during  the  war,  could  not  find 
desirable  housing.  She  became  active  in 
the  Council  for  Civic  Unity  as  a  result. 

From  1970  to  1977,  Lilienthal  worked 
for  Amnesty  International.  As  the  West 
Coast  associate  coordinator,  she  helped 
to  organize  the  group's  presence  here  and 
served  as  national  vice  chair  from  1972 
through  1977.  the.  year  in  which  Am 
nesty  International  was  awarded  the 
Nobel  Peace  Prize. 

Now  that  Ploughshares  has  progressed 
far  beyond  a  start-up  dream,  how  far  will 
it  go?  Can  it  make  a  real  impact? 

David  Cohen,  the  former  president  of 
Common  Cause  who  now  heads  the 
Washington,  D.C. -based  Professionals' 
Coalition  for  Nuclear  Arms  Control  (a 
Ploughshares  grantee),  says  he  is  opti 
mistic  about  the  foundation's  future.  "It's 
an  invention  which  combines  education 
with  mobilization."  he  says,  adding  that 
the  fund  proves  once  again  what  he  learned 
long  ago:  "The  news  that's  worth  listen 
ing  to  travels  from  west  to  east." 

William  Roth,  a  Ploughshares  direc 
tor,  agrees.  "You  hear  about  Plough 
shares  all  around  the  country.  It's  leading 
the  way  for  some  very  large  foundations." 

Lilienthal  and  her  impressive  group  of 
colleagues  started  something  important 
in  her  Pacific  Heights  living  room  back 
in  1981.  Now  they  are  building  for  the 
long  haul.  As  Ploughshares'  prospectus 
stales.  "The  effort  has  to  outlast  us  all." 

Sully  Lilienlhal  means  to  see  thai  it 


Mltrrt  Hum.  Jr.  n  11  Sun  Fmruiiun  frrrianc' 
nriirr  nlin\r  mirk  Hut  itppraml  in  iHr  Surelut 
Nn»  V«fk  Tinir*.  ihr  Sun  KniitciM'o  (.hnmii  U-. 
'.jlifornij  1. 11 1 nc.  unit  numrroui  nnlioniil 


177 


INDEX  —  Sally  Lilienthal 


Abzug,  Bella,   154 

Adams,  Ruth,   102 

African  Americans,   24,  25,  27-28, 

48,  63,  89 

Alexander,  Jane,   154 
Alioto,  Joseph,   39-40 
American  Civil  Liberties,  Union, 

62-67 

American  Indians,   78 
American  Legion,   30 
American  Veterans  Committee,   25 
Amnesty  International,   70-97,  155 
Nobel  Peace  Prize,   79-80 
Urgent  Action  Network,   79-80 
Amsterdam,  Anthony,   62-63 
anti-Semitism,   5-6,  10,  13 
arms  control,   165 
Arms  Control  Association,   158 
arms  race,   100 
arts.   See  San  Francisco  Arts 

Institute,  Art  Commission 
Asawa,  Ruth,   37,  49 
Asian  studies,   20-22 
Audubon  Society,   111 


Baez,  Joan,   86 

Baldwin.  Roger,   86,  96 

Benton,  Marjorie,   119 

Benz,  Obie,   107 

Besig,  Ernest,   63 

Better  Business  Bureau,   92 

black  Americans.   See  African 

Americans 
Boyle,  Kay,   76 
Brimmer,  Barbara,   111 
Burke,  Barbara,   7 
Burke  School,  Katherine  Delmar, 

5-7 

Bush,  George,   110 
Butler,  Lewis,   57,  68,  105-106, 

107,  122,  130,  158 


California  School  of  Fine  Arts, 

board  of  directors,   33-34 
Carnegie  Corporation,   142 
Carnegie  Endowment  for  Peace, 

144,  159 
Carnegie  Institute  of  International 

Peace,   101,  103,  142 
Center  for  Defense  Information, 

104,  113,  138 
Center  for  International  Policy, 

107 
Central  America,  relations  with, 

141 

Chamberlain,  Owen,   111 
Chance,  Ruth,   105 
charity ,   5 
Chicanes,   48 

Chinese,  in  San  Francisco,   19-21 
civil  rights  movement,   25-27,  29, 

60-61 

Clyde,  Dale,   8 
Cohen,  Tom,   21,  23,  25-26,  28, 

29,  30,  44-45,  109,  164 
children,   46-47,  95 
Coleman,  Steve,   161 
Columbia  Foundation,   132 
Colwell,  Mary  Anna,   86 
communism,  anti-communism,   11-12, 

21,  25,  29-30 
Community  Chest,   61,  98 
comprehensive  test  ban,   66 
Council  on  Civic  Unity,   24-29 
Council  on  Foreign  Relations,   57 
Council  on  Foundations,   111,  126, 

129,  162 

Cousins,  Norman,   28 
Cranston,  Alan,   74 
Cuban-American  relations,   121-122 


178 


Davidson,  Joan,   128 

Delancy,  Dick,   63 

DeWind,  Adrian  (Bill),   109-110, 

119 

DiGiorgio,  Pat,   111,  118 
Dinkelspiel,  Joseph,   2 
Dinkelspiel,  Sally,   2 
direct-mail  fundraising,  88-92 


Edgar,  Robert,  147 
Edwards,  Don,   117 
election  campaigns,  1984,  147 
Ellsworth,  Whitney,  88 
Ennals,  Martin,  79-80 
environment ,  environmental 

organizations,  65-66,  91,  99, 

111,  132,  150,  162 
Erikson,  Erik,  118 
Erikson,  Joan,   118 
Erlich,  Dorothy,  52 
Ettiene,  Earl,  132-133 
evaluation,  123-124,  145-146 
expenditure  responsibility,  123 


Fish,  Hamilton,  157 
Flores,  Fernando,  74-76 
Foundation  News,  101 
foundations.   See  also  Ploughshares 
Fund 

and  advocacy,   98-99,  101 

attitudes,  122,  126 

boards  of  directors,  102,  103, 
108,  131,  163-164 

censure,  102,  122,  164-165 

cooperation  between,   126-127, 
132,  135-136,  144,  151,  159 

East  Coast,  70-71 

grantmaking,  34,  67-68,  102,  113, 
127,  151-152 

operating,  127 

policies,  66 

progressive,  109-110,  130 

public,  112,  162-163 

staff,  64,  87,  104,  122 

visibility,  154 


Ford  Foundation,   103,  141 
Fort  Mason,   51-52 
Frankenstein,  Alfred,   40 
Freeze,  [nuclear]  organization, 
143,  138,  151 


Galleria  de  la  Raza,  48,  50 
Garry,  Charles,   28 
Geismar,  Max,  12,  15 
Gerbode,  Martha,  19,  104 
Gerbode,  William  Alexander , 

Foundation,   54,  64,  146 
global  security,  106,  137,  158-159 
Goldman  Fund,   132 
Goldman,  Rhoda ,   132 
Goldman,  Richard,   132 
Gorbachev,  158-159 
Green,  Wade,  152 
Greenpeace,  90-91 
Gunther,  Herb,   158 
Guston,  Phillip,  46 


Haas,  Elise,   36 
Hamburg,  David,   159 
Hammarberg ,  Thomas,   80 
Hardy  Foundation,   127 
Harrison,  Scott,   77-78 
Hart,  Constance  Crowley  Bowles, 
Hart,  Ruth  Arnstein,   6,  7,  8-9 
Heller,  Clarence  (Clary),  104 
Hewlett,  William  and  Flora, 

Foundation ,   98 
Hinerfield,  Ruth,  118 
Holden,  John,   150 
Hopkins,  Henry,  51 
Hopps,  Walter,   49 
Hospitality  House,   35 
Howden,  Ed,   24-25 
human  rights,   114.   See  also 

Amnesty  International 
Hunter,  David,   109,  115,  119, 

121,  130 


179 


individuals,  grants  to,   123-125, 

132-136 
Institute  of  Asian  Studies, 

21-22 
international  grants,   103,  121-124, 

145 
Intermediate  Nuclear  Forces  Treaty 

(INF),   75 


Jaquith,  Wayne,   125,  126,  127-129, 
143,  147,  150-152,  153,  161-162 
Jenkins ,  Becky ,   35 
Jenkins,  David,   29,  35 
Jewish  community,   10,  13-14,  61,  62 

in  Portland,   2-4,  6 
Joint  Foundation  Support,   128 
Jonsen,  Albert,   111 
Junior  League,   62 


Kaplan,  Fund,   127 

Kerr,  Clark,   119 

Kennan,  George,   115,  117,  118, 

137-138 

Koshland,  Dan,   24 
Krepon,  Michael,   144 


LaFarge,  Phyllis,   95 

LARAS  Fund,   86 

LaRocque,  Gene,   101,  104,  138 

Lattimore,  Owen,   21,  22-23 

Lawyers  Alliance  for  Nuclear 

Arms  Control  (LANAC) ,   143 
Layton,  Ginger,   93 
Layton,  Tom,   63-64,  68,  93,  105, 

106,  107,  122,  124,  130,  132, 

146,  158 

Lazaroff,  Cynthia,   125,  134-135 
Lee,  JohnF.,  (Squidge) ,   117-118, 

140 
Lilienthal,  Philip  E. ,   2,  15-16, 

20,  21-22,  39,  46,  75,  94, 

100,  109,  111,  142,  155-157 
Lincoln  Brigade,   11-12 


Lipschutz,  Ronnie,   150 
Lowengart ,  Amy  Dinkelspiel,   1-4, 

6-7,  17-18,  19,  31,  32 
Lowengart  (brother),   3-4,  6,  17 
Lowengart,  Sanford,   2-5,  17,  18, 

20,  32 


MacArthur  Foundation,   102,  127, 

144,  149,  159 
Markey,  Ed,   143 
Martin,  Fred,   34,  38 
Martin,  Mrs.  Fre,d,   42 
Marxists,   25 
May,  John,   69,  70,  112 
McCarran  Committee,   21 
McCone,  Mike,   49 
McCutchen,  Doyle,  Brown  &  Enerson, 

54 

McGovern,  George,  39 
media,  145-146,  154-158 
Members  of  Congress  for  Peace 

Through  Law,   116-117 
Mexican  Americans,   48,  50 
Meyer,  Cord,   28 
military  officers,   101,  104, 

110-111,  117,  125,  133,  138-140 
minorities,   34,  36,  47-50,  63,  89 
Moore ,  Paul 
Morley,  Grace,   43 
Ms.  Foundation,   111 
Museum  of  Modern  Art,  N.Y. ,   57 
Muskiwinni  Foundation,   127,  128 


Nathan,  Ed,   34,  35,  37,  105 

Nation,  The.   157 

National  Association  for  the 

Advancement  of  Colored  People 

[NAACP]  Legal  Defense  Fund, 

105,  109 
National  Endowment  for  the  Arts, 

50 
Natural  Resources  Defense  Council 

[NRDC] ,   119 
neighborhood  arts,   34-37 


180 


Nobel  Peace  Prize,   79-80 
not-for-profit  organizations, 

162-164 
boards  of  directors,  88,  96, 

161 

budgets,  65-66,  113 
censure,  92 
fundraising,  66,  85,  87-92, 

104,  135 

management,  142,  149,  151,  153 
Northern  California  Grantmakers, 

98 

Norton,  Jerry,  49 
nuclear  age,   95 

nuclear  war,  prevention,  65-66, 
100,  104,  126,  127-129, 
139-141,  143 

nuclear  weapons,  24-25,  29,  66, 
128,  137,  138,  144,  148, 
157 


Office  of  War  Information, 

17-23 
Oxfam,  136 


Pacific  Institute  for  Peace  and 
International  Security,  150 

Paley,  Martin,  106 

Palmer,  Hilary,  102,  137 

Parker,  Richard,  90 

Parmenter,  Marian,  53,  55 

Patterson,  Dorothy,  63 

peace,  peace  programs,  28,  95, 
101,  102-104,  106,  110,  113, 
118,  129,  147-151 

Perle,  Richard,  75 

Peterson,  Russ,  111 

philanthropy,  128,  163 
benefits  (auction) ,  39-40 
ethics,  66,  68,  91 
personal,  28,  29,  35,  37-38, 
44,  60-61,  83,  86,  100-101, 
103-1-5,  109,  112,  117,  127, 
130-131,  143,  165-167 
in  San  Francisco,  98-99 


Physicians  for  Social  Responsibility 

[PSR] ,   104,  143 
Ploughshares  Fund,   28,  44,  52,  70, 

100-102 

advisers,  115-119,  137-138 
annual  reports,  114 
board  of  directors,  68,  111, 

122,  136,  141,  144,  146, 

158-161 
contributors  to,  56-59,  110, 

114,  118,  130-131,  143,  166 
fundraising,  91,  119,  127,  128, 

131,  142,  152,  155,  161 
grants,  65,  114,  117,  119, 

123-125,  135-136,  145-151, 

153-154 

policies,  121-123,  132,  134 
programs,  128-129,  144-145, 

153,  157 

public  relations,  81,  154-155 
staff,  115,  125,  126,  128, 

131,  139-143 

political  education,  147-148 
Portland,  Oregon,  12 

Jewish  community ,   2-4 ,  6 
public  policy,   73,  100-101, 

117-118,  128-130,  134,  138-139, 

141,  143-145,  147,  151 


race  relations,  24-25,  27 
Reykjavik,  US-USSR  Summit  Meeting, 

117,  153-154 

Rockefeller  Associates,   101,  152 
Rockefeller  Brothers  Fund,  101, 

102,  137 

Rockefeller,  David,  Jr.,  137 
Rockefeller  Family  Fund,  101 
Rockefeller  Foundation,  101 
Roosevelt,  Eleanor,   28 
Roosevelt,  Franklin,   27-28 
Roth,  William  Matson,  19,  39, 

47-48,  68,  104-106,  111,  114, 

117,  118,  122,  130,  132 
Ruopp,  Phillip,   109 
Russell,  Madeleine,  104 


181 


Sagan,  Ginetta,   81-88,  95 
Salisbury,  Harrison,   118 
SANE,   104,  146,  148,  151 
San  Francisco,   17,  19-20 
Art  Commission,   34-41 
Civic  Center,   35-37 
Jewish  community ,   2,5,8 
San  Francisco  Art  Institute, 

31,  34,  35,  37,  38-49,  42-44, 

47 

San  Francisco  Art  Museum,   47 
neighborhood  artists  program, 

48-50 

rental  gallery,   51-56,  107 
San  Francisco  Foundation,   48,  65, 

67,  69,  103,  106,  164 
San  Francisco  Labor  School,   29-30 
Sarah  Lawrence  College,   7-16,  30, 

44,  131,  166 
sculpture,  47,  71 
Service,  Jack,   21-22,  111,  118 
Shapiro,  Sid,   109 
Sherman  Foundation,   71 
Shulman,  Marshall,   117,  118 
Sierra  Club,   65-66 
Silk,  Susan,   106,  107,  122,  132 
Silk,  Tom,   106,  112,  133 
Sinton,  Carol  Walter,   6,7,9 
Smith,  Jerry,  119 
Soviet-American  relations,   124, 

134,  141,  143,  153,  158-159 
Stanford  University 

international  security  program, 

141-142 

Steinhart,  Jesse,   26 
Stern,  Peter,   107 


Taylor,  Harold,   30 

Tides  Foundation,   112-113 


United  Jewish  Appeal,   61 

United  Nations,   84,  111 

United  Nations  Association,   111, 

118 
University  of  California,  Berkeley, 

11,  58,  89,  102 
Art  Museum,   39 
loyalty  oath,   30 


war,  prevention  of,   29,  65-66,  100, 

104,  126,  127-129,  133,  139-141, 

143 

Warren,  Earl,   26 
Warren,  Constance,   7,  9 
Weiss,  Louis,   29 
Wells,  Albie,   106 
White,  Llewellyn,   48,  69 
Wicker,  Tom,   58 
Wilkie,  Edie,   116-117 
Wirth,  Timothy,   147 
women,   62-63,  65,  67,  86,  95,  115, 

128,  153-154,  165-167 
Women  for  a  Meaningful  Summit, 

153-154 

World  Federalists,   25,  28 
World  War  II,   13-14,  17-23 


Yacht  Club  Group,   101,  104,  137, 

151-152 

youth,   69,  95,  107 
artists,   48-50,  55 


Zellerbach  Family  Fund,   34,  49 
Zellerbach,  Harold,   34-38,  40 
Zellerbach,  James,   37 


Vanguard  Foundation,   107-108 
Velikov,  Evgeny,   159 
Vietnam,  prisoners,   83-84,  106 
volunteers,   77,  80,  82,  86 


December  1988 


VITA 

Gabrielle  Morris 

Senior  Editor 

Regional  Oral  History  Office 

The  Bancroft  Library 

University  of  California,  Berkeley  94720 

Professional  Activities 

Interviewer -editor,  Regional  Oral  History  Office,  1970-present. 
Specialist  in  state  government  history,  local  community  and  social 
concerns,  focussed  on  key  participants'  perceptions  of  selected 
administrative,  legislative,  and  political  issues  in  California  during 
administrations  of  Earl  Warren,  Goodwin  Knight,  Edmund  G.  Brown,  Sr. 

Project  director,  Ronald  Reagan  Gubernatorial  Era  Project  (1979-    ), 
Bay  Area  Foundation  History  Projects  (1974-1977,  1986-    ),   Volunteer 
Leaders  Series  (1978-    ),  Cutter  Laboratories  Project  (1972-1974). 

Panelist  and  consultant,  Joint  Center  for  Political  Studies,  Oral 
History  Association,  National  Council  on  Public  History,  Society  of 
American  Archivists,  local  historical  societies  and  museums;  advisor,  UC 
Graduate  School  of  Education,  California  Heritage  Quilt  Project, 
California  Heritage  Task  Force,  others. 

Prior  Experience 

Historian,  U.S.  Air  Force,  documentation  of  Berlin  Air  Force,  other 
post-World  War  II  issues.   Research,  writing,  policy  development  on 
community  issues  for  University  of  California,  Bay  Area  Council  of 
Social  Planning,  Berkeley  Unified  School  District,  others. 

Education 

Graduate  of  Connecticut  College,  New  London,  in  economics; 
independent  study  in  journalism,  creative  writing;  additional  study  at 
Trinity  College  and  Stanford  University. 


102418 


